From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69D2AC25B08 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2022 03:31:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237518AbiHRDbg (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Aug 2022 23:31:36 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:57148 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235263AbiHRDbf (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Aug 2022 23:31:35 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x102c.google.com (mail-pj1-x102c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FBC69018A for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 20:31:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x102c.google.com with SMTP id m10-20020a17090a730a00b001fa986fd8eeso3560177pjk.0 for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 20:31:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:content-id:mime-version:from:references:in-reply-to :cc:to:subject:from:to:cc; bh=/FofTVsK9IlfmWDW/30e5CfZ6dtBzKhzwgrCZijjfbI=; b=mB1yS1vYVbxnbLAOx6627ADY+O02e+WXza6sjOwJGABfXBTY3VpzPAlHwVNRhAgkpL 63lhS0KGGJynWns23uZCKcvgsI74ZPxrJ5DOaToNaJrisFxb8p7tdGN2dC2fR5jsbyKx whRAAE/v5/CDSZg0aHqKQTN3m8oeF7ZsPk2U6W6gnSDJbksXWXdturFWJJbHJJZXtqbW a9EvAF/89U5qfEhGnqsKVbELGNhT8uebMj6lxePCRNycgogvxtJiFTP5yBSY13XEUmWM Bal6bnxGg7a+UvDJt2/v2wUFBekgRxMfKBpKXyYpgz2AH01O11ymXHtrAld7F4Gopozh s/Pw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:content-id:mime-version:from:references:in-reply-to :cc:to:subject:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=/FofTVsK9IlfmWDW/30e5CfZ6dtBzKhzwgrCZijjfbI=; b=FohHJwR15dy2uqf6q8rASuwy8LnTSD+ddTdX5obt4G2VQLm56BWOt7kOowX6gZoVMg tNWu1seLySHj/4cM+0Diwac7wlGGQC5x1Jen0wFxpeJRbDhWVQpxRKYWRHMx6nQ7QLi4 Ac258cp/da+0xtdZtT6GZbg+dvExaKH8kqqfaToN7z10BZgXteExrhvugEf2UHbGkxP7 HmTsgYgBVuKRNErZcpmjX4x6LQa874Ln9uZmdf4bgVwmSx+DBf+uai/9ZWYGad0a9TzK YjlF37lsxJ53XqvckqbbTIWSeDdwnGhzyaHk4umzy8xzn9yojXdk5qCKesMxNRre4Ri4 gVsw== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo1jaEcYYf0D5Oo7lW24kS/+DIvCnG83DeCkw3tV4IkL7Ro9crcs NSM067SQqhRF7h/6ZO7HJlg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR553t23v7IhCqnNZug6TWxNafJto6HeUEF1Zw4rWaUTbhI2gj7Xw/m1k9CwDp0l0Ah7MYcAkw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3141:b0:1f7:75cf:a449 with SMTP id ip1-20020a17090b314100b001f775cfa449mr1082653pjb.18.1660793494535; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 20:31:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jromail.nowhere (h219-110-108-104.catv02.itscom.jp. [219.110.108.104]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u15-20020a170902e80f00b0016d95380e8esm193203plg.140.2022.08.17.20.31.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 17 Aug 2022 20:31:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=jrobl) by jrobl id 1oOWFo-0002SS-7m ; Thu, 18 Aug 2022 12:31:32 +0900 Subject: Re: NFS, two d_delete() calls in nfs_unlink() To: "NeilBrown" Cc: trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <166079133167.5425.16635199337074058478@noble.neil.brown.name> References: <7634.1660728564@jrobl> <166079133167.5425.16635199337074058478@noble.neil.brown.name> From: hooanon05g@gmail.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <9450.1660793491.1@jrobl> Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2022 12:31:31 +0900 Message-ID: <9451.1660793491@jrobl> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org "NeilBrown": > Thanks for the report. > This possibility of calling d_delete() twice has been present > since 9019fb391de0 in v5.16. I don't think 9019fb391de0 is a problem. Before v6.0-rc1, the target dentry was unhashed by __d_drop() call in nfs_unlink(), and nfs_dentry_handle_enoent() skipped calling d_delete() by simple_positive(). d_delete() was called only once via nfs_dentry_remove_handle_error(). In v6.0-rc1, the dentry is not unhashed and nfs_dentry_handle_enoent() doesn't skip calling d_delete(). > How did you discover this bug, and why do you think my patch > caused it? I met this problem during a stress test aiming a filesystem I am developing. And I think unhashing causes nfs_dentry_handle_enoent() to call d_delete(). J. R. Okajima