From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] nfsd4: fix open downgrade, again
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:49:31 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110920184931.GA15273@fieldses.org> (raw)
I intend to queue this up for 3.2.--b.
commit 3d02fa29dec920c597dd7b7db608a4bc71f088ce
Author: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@redhat.com>
Date: Mon Sep 19 15:07:41 2011 -0400
nfsd4: fix open downgrade, again
Yet another open-management regression:
- nfs4_file_downgrade() doesn't remove the BOTH access bit on
downgrade, so the server's idea of the stateid's access gets
out of sync with the client's. If we want to keep an O_RDWR
open in this case, we should do that in the file_put_access
logic rather than here.
- We forgot to convert v4 access to an open mode here.
This logic has proven too hard to get right. In the future we may
consider:
- reexamining the lock/openowner relationship (locks probably
don't really need to take their own references here).
- adding open upgrade/downgrade support to the vfs.
- removing the atomic operations. They're redundant as long as
this is all under some other lock.
Also, maybe some kind of additional static checking would help catch
O_/NFS4_SHARE_ACCESS confusion.
Cc: stable@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@redhat.com>
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
index e5cba83..edcced1 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
@@ -194,8 +194,15 @@ static void nfs4_file_put_fd(struct nfs4_file *fp, int oflag)
static void __nfs4_file_put_access(struct nfs4_file *fp, int oflag)
{
if (atomic_dec_and_test(&fp->fi_access[oflag])) {
- nfs4_file_put_fd(fp, O_RDWR);
nfs4_file_put_fd(fp, oflag);
+ /*
+ * It's also safe to get rid of the RDWR open *if*
+ * we no longer have need of the other kind of access
+ * or if we already have the other kind of open:
+ */
+ if (fp->fi_fds[1-oflag]
+ || atomic_read(&fp->fi_access[1 - oflag]) == 0)
+ nfs4_file_put_fd(fp, O_RDWR);
}
}
@@ -3500,8 +3507,9 @@ static inline void nfs4_file_downgrade(struct nfs4_ol_stateid *stp, unsigned int
int i;
for (i = 1; i < 4; i++) {
- if (test_bit(i, &stp->st_access_bmap) && !(i & to_access)) {
- nfs4_file_put_access(stp->st_file, i);
+ if (test_bit(i, &stp->st_access_bmap)
+ && ((i & to_access) != i)) {
+ nfs4_file_put_access(stp->st_file, nfs4_access_to_omode(i));
__clear_bit(i, &stp->st_access_bmap);
}
}
reply other threads:[~2011-09-20 18:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=20110920184931.GA15273@fieldses.org \
--to=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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).