From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
To: Alexander Aring <aahringo@redhat.com>, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Cc: cluster-devel@redhat.com, ocfs2-devel@lists.linux.dev,
chuck.lever@oracle.com, anna@kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com
Subject: Re: [Cluster-devel] [RFCv2 5/7] dlm: use fl_owner from lockd
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 08:02:04 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <527071b5b9620fee6b6c2cbf2efe8381e48f778d.camel@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230814211116.3224759-6-aahringo@redhat.com>
On Mon, 2023-08-14 at 17:11 -0400, Alexander Aring wrote:
> This patch is changing the fl_owner value in case of an nfs lock request
> to not be the pid of lockd. Instead this patch changes it to be the
> owner value that nfs is giving us.
>
> Currently there exists proved problems with this behaviour. One nfsd
> server was created to export a gfs2 filesystem mount. Two nfs clients
> doing a nfs mount of this export. Those two clients should conflict each
> other operating on the same nfs file.
>
> A small test program was written:
>
> int main(int argc, const char *argv[])
> {
> struct flock fl = {
> .l_type = F_WRLCK,
> .l_whence = SEEK_SET,
> .l_start = 1L,
> .l_len = 1L,
> };
> int fd;
>
> fd = open("filename", O_RDWR | O_CREAT, 0700);
> printf("try to lock...\n");
> fcntl(fd, F_SETLKW, &fl);
> printf("locked!\n");
> getc(stdin);
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> Running on both clients at the same time and don't interrupting by
> pressing any key. It will show that both clients are able to acquire the
> lock which shouldn't be the case. The issue is here that the fl_owner
> value is the same and the lock context of both clients should be
> separated.
>
> This patch lets lockd define how to deal with lock contexts and chose
> hopefully the right fl_owner value. A test after this patch was made and
> the locks conflicts each other which should be the case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Aring <aahringo@redhat.com>
> ---
> fs/dlm/plock.c | 18 ++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/dlm/plock.c b/fs/dlm/plock.c
> index 00e1d802a81c..0094fa4004cc 100644
> --- a/fs/dlm/plock.c
> +++ b/fs/dlm/plock.c
> @@ -145,6 +145,7 @@ int dlm_posix_lock(dlm_lockspace_t *lockspace, u64 number, struct file *file,
> op->info.number = number;
> op->info.start = fl->fl_start;
> op->info.end = fl->fl_end;
> + op->info.owner = (__u64)(long)fl->fl_owner;
> /* async handling */
> if (fl->fl_lmops && fl->fl_lmops->lm_grant) {
> op_data = kzalloc(sizeof(*op_data), GFP_NOFS);
> @@ -154,9 +155,6 @@ int dlm_posix_lock(dlm_lockspace_t *lockspace, u64 number, struct file *file,
> goto out;
> }
>
> - /* fl_owner is lockd which doesn't distinguish
> - processes on the nfs client */
> - op->info.owner = (__u64) fl->fl_pid;
> op_data->callback = fl->fl_lmops->lm_grant;
> locks_init_lock(&op_data->flc);
> locks_copy_lock(&op_data->flc, fl);
> @@ -168,8 +166,6 @@ int dlm_posix_lock(dlm_lockspace_t *lockspace, u64 number, struct file *file,
> send_op(op);
> rv = FILE_LOCK_DEFERRED;
> goto out;
> - } else {
> - op->info.owner = (__u64)(long) fl->fl_owner;
> }
>
> send_op(op);
> @@ -326,10 +322,7 @@ int dlm_posix_unlock(dlm_lockspace_t *lockspace, u64 number, struct file *file,
> op->info.number = number;
> op->info.start = fl->fl_start;
> op->info.end = fl->fl_end;
> - if (fl->fl_lmops && fl->fl_lmops->lm_grant)
> - op->info.owner = (__u64) fl->fl_pid;
> - else
> - op->info.owner = (__u64)(long) fl->fl_owner;
> + op->info.owner = (__u64)(long)fl->fl_owner;
>
> if (fl->fl_flags & FL_CLOSE) {
> op->info.flags |= DLM_PLOCK_FL_CLOSE;
> @@ -389,7 +382,7 @@ int dlm_posix_cancel(dlm_lockspace_t *lockspace, u64 number, struct file *file,
> info.number = number;
> info.start = fl->fl_start;
> info.end = fl->fl_end;
> - info.owner = (__u64)fl->fl_pid;
> + info.owner = (__u64)(long)fl->fl_owner;
>
> rv = do_lock_cancel(&info);
> switch (rv) {
> @@ -450,10 +443,7 @@ int dlm_posix_get(dlm_lockspace_t *lockspace, u64 number, struct file *file,
> op->info.number = number;
> op->info.start = fl->fl_start;
> op->info.end = fl->fl_end;
> - if (fl->fl_lmops && fl->fl_lmops->lm_grant)
> - op->info.owner = (__u64) fl->fl_pid;
> - else
> - op->info.owner = (__u64)(long) fl->fl_owner;
> + op->info.owner = (__u64)(long)fl->fl_owner;
>
> send_op(op);
> wait_event(recv_wq, (op->done != 0));
This is the way.
Acked-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-16 12:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-14 21:11 [Cluster-devel] [RFCv2 0/7] fs: nfs: async lock request changes Alexander Aring
2023-08-14 21:11 ` [Cluster-devel] [RFCv2 1/7] lockd: fix race in async lock request handling Alexander Aring
2023-08-15 17:49 ` Jeff Layton
2023-08-15 18:21 ` Jeff Layton
2023-08-17 18:39 ` Alexander Aring
2023-08-17 18:36 ` Alexander Aring
2023-08-14 21:11 ` [Cluster-devel] [RFCv2 2/7] lockd: FILE_LOCK_DEFERRED only on FL_SLEEP Alexander Aring
2023-08-16 11:37 ` Jeff Layton
2023-08-17 1:40 ` Alexander Aring
2023-08-14 21:11 ` [Cluster-devel] [RFCv2 3/7] lockd: introduce safe async lock op Alexander Aring
2023-08-16 11:43 ` Jeff Layton
2023-08-14 21:11 ` [Cluster-devel] [RFCv2 4/7] locks: update lock callback documentation Alexander Aring
2023-08-16 12:01 ` Jeff Layton
2023-08-17 1:23 ` Alexander Aring
2023-08-14 21:11 ` [Cluster-devel] [RFCv2 5/7] dlm: use fl_owner from lockd Alexander Aring
2023-08-16 12:02 ` Jeff Layton [this message]
2023-08-14 21:11 ` [Cluster-devel] [RFCv2 6/7] dlm: use FL_SLEEP to check if blocking request Alexander Aring
2023-08-16 13:07 ` Jeff Layton
2023-08-17 1:19 ` Alexander Aring
2023-08-17 11:27 ` Jeff Layton
2023-08-17 13:02 ` Alexander Aring
2023-08-14 21:11 ` [Cluster-devel] [RFCv2 7/7] dlm: implement EXPORT_OP_SAFE_ASYNC_LOCK Alexander Aring
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=527071b5b9620fee6b6c2cbf2efe8381e48f778d.camel@kernel.org \
--to=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=aahringo@redhat.com \
--cc=anna@kernel.org \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=cluster-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ocfs2-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).