Linux NFS development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
Cc: Frank van Maarseveen <frankvm@frankvm.com>,
	Linux NFS mailing list <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [NLM] 2.6.27 broken
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 18:33:48 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090204233348.GD20917@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081216201610.GE18928@fieldses.org>

On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 03:16:10PM -0500, bfields wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 08:43:52PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-12-16 at 12:39 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > > More precisely, it looks like this started with
> > > 
> > > 	bde74e4bc64415b142e "locks: add special return value for
> > > 		asynchronous locks"
> > > 
> > > But I haven't had the chance to look any harder yet.  Miklos?  Is this
> > > easy for you to reproduce?
> > 
> > Not immediately, at the moment I don't have NFS set up.  But if you
> > don't beat me to it, I'll look into this.
> 
> OK, thanks.  I'll take another look too when I get the chance, so let me
> know of any partial result.
> 
> It may just for example be returning the wrong error to the client on an
> nlm blocking lock request, so that the client assumes the lock is gone
> and goes away rather than waiting for a grant request.

Sorry, I've gotten a bit backlogged, but I finally got back to this.  If
there's no objections, the following is what I intend to submit.

--b.

commit cb8b864ea6addd3a3e72fe835aafecec63f06cbd
Author: J. Bruce Fields <bfields-+qGSg9AQ1cLTsXDwO4sDpg@public.gmane.org>
Date:   Wed Feb 4 17:35:38 2009 -0500

    lockd: fix regression in lockd's handling of blocked locks
    
    If a client requests a blocking lock, is denied, then requests it again,
    then here in nlmsvc_lock() we will call vfs_lock_file() without FL_SLEEP
    set, because we've already queued a block and don't need the locks code
    to do it again.
    
    But that means vfs_lock_file() will return -EAGAIN instead of
    FILE_LOCK_DENIED.  So we still need to translate that -EAGAIN return
    into a nlm_lck_blocked error in this case, and put ourselves back on
    lockd's block list.
    
    The bug was introduced by bde74e4bc64415b1 "locks: add special return
    value for asynchronous locks".
    
    Thanks to From: Frank van Maarseveen for the report; his original test
    case was essentially
    
    	for i in `seq 30`; do flock /nfsmount/foo sleep 10 & done
    
    Cc: Frank van Maarseveen <frankvm@frankvm.com>
    Cc: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
    Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@citi.umich.edu>

diff --git a/fs/lockd/svclock.c b/fs/lockd/svclock.c
index 6063a8e..763b78a 100644
--- a/fs/lockd/svclock.c
+++ b/fs/lockd/svclock.c
@@ -427,7 +427,7 @@ nlmsvc_lock(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nlm_file *file,
 			goto out;
 		case -EAGAIN:
 			ret = nlm_lck_denied;
-			goto out;
+			break;
 		case FILE_LOCK_DEFERRED:
 			if (wait)
 				break;
@@ -443,6 +443,10 @@ nlmsvc_lock(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nlm_file *file,
 			goto out;
 	}
 
+	ret = nlm_lck_denied;
+	if (!wait)
+		goto out;
+
 	ret = nlm_lck_blocked;
 
 	/* Append to list of blocked */

  reply	other threads:[~2009-02-04 23:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-11-15 13:28 [NLM] 2.6.27 broken Frank van Maarseveen
2008-11-20 22:27 ` J. Bruce Fields
2008-11-28 11:24   ` Frank van Maarseveen
2008-12-16 17:39     ` J. Bruce Fields
2008-12-16 19:43       ` Miklos Szeredi
2008-12-16 20:16         ` J. Bruce Fields
2009-02-04 23:33           ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
2009-02-05 10:21             ` Frank van Maarseveen
2009-02-05 19:52               ` J. Bruce Fields
2009-02-05 10:47             ` Miklos Szeredi
2009-02-05 19:52               ` J. Bruce Fields
2009-02-06 11:29                 ` Miklos Szeredi
2009-02-09 18:10                   ` J. Bruce Fields
2009-02-09 20:18                     ` Miklos Szeredi
2009-02-09 20:51                       ` J. Bruce Fields

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=20090204233348.GD20917@fieldses.org \
    --to=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=frankvm@frankvm.com \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mszeredi@suse.cz \
    /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