From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>, Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, Olga Kornievskaia <kolga@netapp.com>,
Dai Ngo <Dai.Ngo@oracle.com>, Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] nfsd: hold ->cl_lock for hash_delegation_locked()
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 05:59:13 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <40e1bf417c635ce303f9e42ddb0e3dbd90022477.camel@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231117022121.23310-2-neilb@suse.de>
On Fri, 2023-11-17 at 13:18 +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> The protocol for creating a new state in nfsd is to allocated the state
> leaving it largely uninitialised, add that state to the ->cl_stateids
> idr so as to reserve a state id, then complete initialisation of the
> state and only set ->sc_type to non-zero once the state is fully
> initialised.
>
> If a state is found in the idr with ->sc_type == 0, it is ignored.
> The ->cl_lock list is used to avoid races - it is held while checking
> sc_type during lookup, and held when a non-zero value is stored in
> ->sc_type.
>
> ... except... hash_delegation_locked() finalises the initialisation of a
> delegation state, but does NOT hold ->cl_lock.
>
> So this patch takes ->cl_lock at the appropriate time w.r.t other locks,
> and so ensures there are no races (which are extremely unlikely in any
> case).
>
> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> ---
> fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> index 65fd5510323a..6368788a7d4e 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> @@ -1317,6 +1317,7 @@ hash_delegation_locked(struct nfs4_delegation *dp, struct nfs4_file *fp)
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&state_lock);
> lockdep_assert_held(&fp->fi_lock);
> + lockdep_assert_held(&clp->cl_lock);
>
> if (nfs4_delegation_exists(clp, fp))
> return -EAGAIN;
> @@ -5609,12 +5610,14 @@ nfs4_set_delegation(struct nfsd4_open *open, struct nfs4_ol_stateid *stp,
> goto out_unlock;
>
> spin_lock(&state_lock);
> + spin_lock(&clp->cl_lock);
> spin_lock(&fp->fi_lock);
> if (fp->fi_had_conflict)
> status = -EAGAIN;
> else
> status = hash_delegation_locked(dp, fp);
> spin_unlock(&fp->fi_lock);
> + spin_unlock(&clp->cl_lock);
> spin_unlock(&state_lock);
>
> if (status)
I know it's (supposedly) an unlikely race, but should we send this to
stable?
Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-17 10:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-17 2:18 [PATCH 0/9 v3] support admin-revocation of v4 state NeilBrown
2023-11-17 2:18 ` [PATCH 1/9] nfsd: hold ->cl_lock for hash_delegation_locked() NeilBrown
2023-11-17 10:59 ` Jeff Layton [this message]
2023-11-19 21:37 ` NeilBrown
2023-11-19 23:38 ` Chuck Lever
2023-11-19 23:41 ` NeilBrown
2023-11-17 15:04 ` Chuck Lever
2023-11-19 22:07 ` NeilBrown
2023-11-17 2:18 ` [PATCH 2/9] nfsd: avoid race after unhash_delegation_locked() NeilBrown
2023-11-17 11:41 ` Jeff Layton
2023-11-17 19:43 ` Chuck Lever
2023-11-19 22:23 ` NeilBrown
2023-11-19 23:41 ` Chuck Lever
2023-11-17 2:18 ` [PATCH 3/9] nfsd: split sc_status out of sc_type NeilBrown
2023-11-17 19:52 ` Chuck Lever
2023-11-19 22:35 ` NeilBrown
2023-11-17 2:18 ` [PATCH 4/9] nfsd: prepare for supporting admin-revocation of state NeilBrown
2023-11-17 2:18 ` [PATCH 5/9] nfsd: allow admin-revoked state to appear in /proc/fs/nfsd/clients/*/states NeilBrown
2023-11-17 11:27 ` Jeff Layton
2023-11-19 22:36 ` NeilBrown
2023-11-17 2:18 ` [PATCH 6/9] nfsd: allow admin-revoked NFSv4.0 state to be freed NeilBrown
2023-11-17 11:34 ` Jeff Layton
2023-11-19 22:40 ` NeilBrown
2023-11-17 19:58 ` Chuck Lever
2023-11-19 22:47 ` NeilBrown
2023-11-19 23:44 ` Chuck Lever
2023-11-17 2:18 ` [PATCH 7/9] nfsd: allow lock state ids to be revoked and then freed NeilBrown
2023-11-17 2:18 ` [PATCH 8/9] nfsd: allow open " NeilBrown
2023-11-17 2:18 ` [PATCH 9/9] nfsd: allow delegation " NeilBrown
2023-11-17 12:25 ` [PATCH 0/9 v3] support admin-revocation of v4 state Jeff Layton
2023-11-19 23:21 ` NeilBrown
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=40e1bf417c635ce303f9e42ddb0e3dbd90022477.camel@kernel.org \
--to=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=Dai.Ngo@oracle.com \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=kolga@netapp.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=tom@talpey.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