From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 119A2313276 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2026 22:07:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771366054; cv=none; b=MC3ZEgL0d0Jq+nT01k2RX4lYpb5uBY4X9/cKoYn5glgbX/OHRK/I3v9sWUAvl31LLIFX2y1/Uqkw21iAu+aWyfwrmKFX2/TEu6ulg0A/PJShRYdCQSAteJ8i3UTJC5UYhu9UaPHy3WH6iw3f4Fu5hu5bUYcNQaibMSS7TdwSQkU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771366054; c=relaxed/simple; bh=BAkH9ikchr3jDUIlQGxRUllzM+LAPCQM1xW1plfdA3k=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=WHyXzqND8Db6QqYlcyxs+Rf9KuciyQ7qLWNJUY73+BKYFtT8pDHZp4gw+7aHeu7nnuAtRUHLvGLe11306VaqTOznEgtVLLByWcldtkeKpp93IW6xhM6M8WpTuwmcEbZjozAVIPdioXww3lFfD7SnQBGWcel73PpVPx0Cl2uAx+M= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=F1dapbQN; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="F1dapbQN" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 12761C19423; Tue, 17 Feb 2026 22:07:33 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1771366053; bh=BAkH9ikchr3jDUIlQGxRUllzM+LAPCQM1xW1plfdA3k=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=F1dapbQNzDq0sYRkaQkkdsPttI4UxoQ6/1WqmRClzkfYIhDIOJMPD4Yn3C3MVM9Zk blpPoXPHXVM1qXdPHV0ehrm+fXjK+rL9vjASzIgjvdwm8xFbAI53UiDrmu7LyTf31J oCEawIyhRC8MJhOIOImXXp2T8KmarjyYpEiehFexv7+1mtUJTM8RJfhCdGZts1fNYe FNhIGD/2mC31n+BYO7pJ3at2ZHrDf88wg5+0dDkobb/eBbgGqqB2XAdfCE2HadFO2h ap9VwS615k3P+J8sZ5sj+Ain2LUHLI8Tw0O0f6QOxY3fH6YKA/eh9thA1oZNh3LzxO kwEk5zOemVYcA== From: Chuck Lever To: NeilBrown , Jeff Layton , Olga Kornievskaia , Dai Ngo , Tom Talpey Cc: , Chuck Lever Subject: [PATCH v3 09/29] lockd: Use xdrgen XDR functions for the NLMv4 TEST_MSG procedure Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2026 17:07:01 -0500 Message-ID: <20260217220721.1928847-10-cel@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.53.0 In-Reply-To: <20260217220721.1928847-1-cel@kernel.org> References: <20260217220721.1928847-1-cel@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: Chuck Lever The TEST_MSG procedure is part of NLM's asynchronous lock request flow, where clients send TEST_MSG to check lock availability without blocking. This patch continues the xdrgen migration by converting TEST_MSG to use generated XDR functions. This patch converts the TEST_MSG procedure to use xdrgen functions nlm4_svc_decode_nlm4_testargs and nlm4_svc_encode_void generated from the NLM version 4 protocol specification. The procedure handler uses xdrgen types through the nlm4_testargs_wrapper structure that bridges between generated code and the legacy nlm_lock representation. The pc_argzero field is set to zero because xdrgen decoders reliably initialize all arguments in the argp->xdrgen field, making the early defensive memset unnecessary. Remaining argp fields are cleared as needed. The NLM async callback mechanism uses client-side functions which continue to take legacy results like struct nlm_res, preventing TEST and TEST_MSG from sharing code for now. Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever --- fs/lockd/svc4proc.c | 114 +++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------- 1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/lockd/svc4proc.c b/fs/lockd/svc4proc.c index f1a692f72a39..afce778b62d3 100644 --- a/fs/lockd/svc4proc.c +++ b/fs/lockd/svc4proc.c @@ -260,39 +260,6 @@ nlm4svc_proc_null(struct svc_rqst *rqstp) return rpc_success; } -/* - * TEST: Check for conflicting lock - */ -static __be32 -__nlm4svc_proc_test(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nlm_res *resp) -{ - struct nlm_args *argp = rqstp->rq_argp; - struct nlm_host *host; - struct nlm_file *file; - __be32 rc = rpc_success; - - dprintk("lockd: TEST4 called\n"); - resp->cookie = argp->cookie; - - /* Obtain client and file */ - if ((resp->status = nlm4svc_retrieve_args(rqstp, argp, &host, &file))) - return resp->status == nlm__int__drop_reply ? - rpc_drop_reply : rpc_success; - - /* Now check for conflicting locks */ - resp->status = nlmsvc_testlock(rqstp, file, host, &argp->lock, - &resp->lock); - if (resp->status == nlm__int__drop_reply) - rc = rpc_drop_reply; - else - dprintk("lockd: TEST4 status %d\n", ntohl(resp->status)); - - nlmsvc_release_lockowner(&argp->lock); - nlmsvc_release_host(host); - nlm_release_file(file); - return rc; -} - /** * nlm4svc_proc_test - TEST: Check for conflicting lock * @rqstp: RPC transaction context @@ -785,25 +752,64 @@ nlm4svc_callback(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nlm_host *host, u32 proc, return rpc_success; } -/* - * 'Async' versions of the above service routines. They aren't really, - * because we send the callback before the reply proper. I hope this - * doesn't break any clients. - */ +static __be32 +__nlm4svc_proc_test_msg(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nlm_res *resp) +{ + struct nlm4_testargs_wrapper *argp = rqstp->rq_argp; + unsigned char type = argp->xdrgen.exclusive ? F_WRLCK : F_RDLCK; + struct nlm_lockowner *owner; + struct nlm_file *file = NULL; + struct nlm_host *host = NULL; + resp->status = nlm_lck_denied_nolocks; + if (nlm4_netobj_to_cookie(&resp->cookie, &argp->xdrgen.cookie)) + goto out; + + host = nlm4svc_lookup_host(rqstp, argp->xdrgen.alock.caller_name, false); + if (!host) + goto out; + + resp->status = nlm4svc_lookup_file(rqstp, host, &argp->lock, + &file, &argp->xdrgen.alock, type); + if (resp->status) + goto out; + + owner = argp->lock.fl.c.flc_owner; + resp->status = nlmsvc_testlock(rqstp, file, host, &argp->lock, + &resp->lock); + nlmsvc_put_lockowner(owner); + +out: + if (file) + nlm_release_file(file); + nlmsvc_release_host(host); + return resp->status == nlm__int__drop_reply ? rpc_drop_reply : rpc_success; +} + +/** + * nlm4svc_proc_test_msg - TEST_MSG: Check for conflicting lock + * @rqstp: RPC transaction context + * + * Returns: + * %rpc_success: RPC executed successfully. + * %rpc_system_err: RPC execution failed. + * + * RPC synopsis: + * void NLMPROC4_TEST_MSG(nlm4_testargs) = 6; + * + * The response to this request is delivered via the TEST_RES procedure. + */ static __be32 nlm4svc_proc_test_msg(struct svc_rqst *rqstp) { - struct nlm_args *argp = rqstp->rq_argp; - struct nlm_host *host; + struct nlm4_testargs_wrapper *argp = rqstp->rq_argp; + struct nlm_host *host; - dprintk("lockd: TEST_MSG called\n"); - - host = nlmsvc_lookup_host(rqstp, argp->lock.caller, argp->lock.len); + host = nlm4svc_lookup_host(rqstp, argp->xdrgen.alock.caller_name, false); if (!host) return rpc_system_err; - return nlm4svc_callback(rqstp, host, NLMPROC_TEST_RES, - __nlm4svc_proc_test); + return nlm4svc_callback(rqstp, host, NLMPROC4_TEST_RES, + __nlm4svc_proc_test_msg); } static __be32 nlm4svc_proc_lock_msg(struct svc_rqst *rqstp) @@ -1087,15 +1093,15 @@ static const struct svc_procedure nlm4svc_procedures[24] = { .pc_xdrressize = NLM4_nlm4_res_sz, .pc_name = "GRANTED", }, - [NLMPROC_TEST_MSG] = { - .pc_func = nlm4svc_proc_test_msg, - .pc_decode = nlm4svc_decode_testargs, - .pc_encode = nlm4svc_encode_void, - .pc_argsize = sizeof(struct nlm_args), - .pc_argzero = sizeof(struct nlm_args), - .pc_ressize = sizeof(struct nlm_void), - .pc_xdrressize = St, - .pc_name = "TEST_MSG", + [NLMPROC4_TEST_MSG] = { + .pc_func = nlm4svc_proc_test_msg, + .pc_decode = nlm4_svc_decode_nlm4_testargs, + .pc_encode = nlm4_svc_encode_void, + .pc_argsize = sizeof(struct nlm4_testargs_wrapper), + .pc_argzero = 0, + .pc_ressize = 0, + .pc_xdrressize = XDR_void, + .pc_name = "TEST_MSG", }, [NLMPROC_LOCK_MSG] = { .pc_func = nlm4svc_proc_lock_msg, -- 2.53.0