From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] nfsd: take struct file setup fully into nfs4_preprocess_stateid_op
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 16:50:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150428205049.GD16090@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150428204455.GC16090@fieldses.org>
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 04:44:55PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 03:41:19PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > This patch changes nfs4_preprocess_stateid_op so it always returns
> > a valid struct file if it has been asked for that. For that we
> > now allocate a temporary struct file for special stateids, and check
> > permissions if we got the file structure from the stateid. This
> > ensures that all callers will get their handling of special stateids
> > right, and avoids code duplication.
> >
> > There is a little wart in here because the read code needs to know
> > if we allocated a file structure so that it can copy around the
> > read-ahead parameters. In the long run we should probably aim to
> > cache full file structures used with special stateids instead.
>
> This causes a failure on pynfs OPEN23b.
>
> It's doing a READ using a stateid from a write open. We previously
> returned NFS_OK, taking the "may" option from:
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7530#page-111
>
> In the case of READ, the server may perform the corresponding
> check on the access mode, or it may choose to allow READ on
> opens for WRITE only, to accommodate clients whose write
> implementation may unavoidably do reads (e.g., due to buffer
> cache constraints).
>
> OPENMODE might also have been OK, but we're returning SERVERFAULT. I
> guess the old code was passing preprocess_stateid_op without returning a
> file, then relying on a temporary open for the read? Ugh.
Hm, and writes with special stateids (e.g. WRT1) are timing out, I
haven't figured that out.
--b.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-28 20:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-28 13:41 refactor stateid checking and file allocation Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-28 13:41 ` [PATCH 1/6] nfsd: fix the check for confirmed openowner in nfs4_preprocess_stateid_op Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-28 19:12 ` J. Bruce Fields
2015-04-28 13:41 ` [PATCH 2/6] nfsd: remove nfsd_close Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-28 13:41 ` [PATCH 3/6] nfsd: refactor nfs4_preprocess_stateid_op Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-28 13:41 ` [PATCH 4/6] nfsd: clean up raparams handling Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-28 13:41 ` [PATCH 5/6] nfsd: take struct file setup fully into nfs4_preprocess_stateid_op Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-28 20:44 ` J. Bruce Fields
2015-04-28 20:50 ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
2015-04-29 13:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-29 14:16 ` J. Bruce Fields
2015-04-28 13:41 ` [PATCH 6/6] nfsd: drop the file argument to nfsd_write Christoph Hellwig
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=20150428205049.GD16090@fieldses.org \
--to=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--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).