public inbox for linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: dai.ngo@oracle.com
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
	Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>, Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>,
	Olga Kornievskaia <kolga@netapp.com>, Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com>
Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] nfsd: don't hand out write delegations on O_WRONLY opens
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2023 09:29:37 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8c3adfce-39f0-0e60-e35a-2f1be6fb67e6@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230801-wdeleg-v2-1-20c14252bab4@kernel.org>


On 8/1/23 6:33 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> I noticed that xfstests generic/001 was failing against linux-next nfsd.
>
> The client would request a OPEN4_SHARE_ACCESS_WRITE open, and the server
> would hand out a write delegation. The client would then try to use that
> write delegation as the source stateid in a COPY

not sure why the client opens the source file of a COPY operation with
OPEN4_SHARE_ACCESS_WRITE?

>   or CLONE operation, and
> the server would respond with NFS4ERR_STALE.

If the server does not allow client to use write delegation for the
READ, should the correct error return be NFS4ERR_OPENMODE?

>
> The problem is that the struct file associated with the delegation does
> not necessarily have read permissions. It's handing out a write
> delegation on what is effectively an O_WRONLY open. RFC 8881 states:
>
>   "An OPEN_DELEGATE_WRITE delegation allows the client to handle, on its
>    own, all opens."
>
> Given that the client didn't request any read permissions, and that nfsd
> didn't check for any, it seems wrong to give out a write delegation.
>
> Only hand out a write delegation if we have a O_RDWR descriptor
> available. If it fails to find an appropriate write descriptor, go
> ahead and try for a read delegation if NFS4_SHARE_ACCESS_READ was
> requested.
>
> This fixes xfstest generic/001.
>
> Closes: https://bugzilla.linux-nfs.org/show_bug.cgi?id=412
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - Rework the logic when finding struct file for the delegation. The
>    earlier patch might still have attached a O_WRONLY file to the deleg
>    in some cases, and could still have handed out a write delegation on
>    an O_WRONLY OPEN request in some cases.
> ---
>   fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++-----------
>   1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> index ef7118ebee00..e79d82fd05e7 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> @@ -5449,7 +5449,7 @@ nfs4_set_delegation(struct nfsd4_open *open, struct nfs4_ol_stateid *stp,
>   	struct nfs4_file *fp = stp->st_stid.sc_file;
>   	struct nfs4_clnt_odstate *odstate = stp->st_clnt_odstate;
>   	struct nfs4_delegation *dp;
> -	struct nfsd_file *nf;
> +	struct nfsd_file *nf = NULL;
>   	struct file_lock *fl;
>   	u32 dl_type;
>   
> @@ -5461,21 +5461,28 @@ nfs4_set_delegation(struct nfsd4_open *open, struct nfs4_ol_stateid *stp,
>   	if (fp->fi_had_conflict)
>   		return ERR_PTR(-EAGAIN);
>   
> -	if (open->op_share_access & NFS4_SHARE_ACCESS_WRITE) {
> -		nf = find_writeable_file(fp);
> +	/*
> +	 * Try for a write delegation first. We need an O_RDWR file
> +	 * since a write delegation allows the client to perform any open
> +	 * from its cache.
> +	 */
> +	if ((open->op_share_access & NFS4_SHARE_ACCESS_BOTH) == NFS4_SHARE_ACCESS_BOTH) {
> +		nf = nfsd_file_get(fp->fi_fds[O_RDWR]);
>   		dl_type = NFS4_OPEN_DELEGATE_WRITE;
> -	} else {

Does this mean OPEN4_SHARE_ACCESS_WRITE do not get a write delegation?
It does not seem right.

-Dai

> +	}
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * If the file is being opened O_RDONLY or we couldn't get a O_RDWR
> +	 * file for some reason, then try for a read deleg instead.
> +	 */
> +	if (!nf && (open->op_share_access & NFS4_SHARE_ACCESS_READ)) {
>   		nf = find_readable_file(fp);
>   		dl_type = NFS4_OPEN_DELEGATE_READ;
>   	}
> -	if (!nf) {
> -		/*
> -		 * We probably could attempt another open and get a read
> -		 * delegation, but for now, don't bother until the
> -		 * client actually sends us one.
> -		 */
> +
> +	if (!nf)
>   		return ERR_PTR(-EAGAIN);
> -	}
> +
>   	spin_lock(&state_lock);
>   	spin_lock(&fp->fi_lock);
>   	if (nfs4_delegation_exists(clp, fp))
>
> ---
> base-commit: a734662572708cf062e974f659ae50c24fc1ad17
> change-id: 20230731-wdeleg-bbdb6b25a3c6
>
> Best regards,

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-08-02 16:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-08-01 13:33 [PATCH v2] nfsd: don't hand out write delegations on O_WRONLY opens Jeff Layton
2023-08-01 22:26 ` NeilBrown
2023-08-01 22:51   ` Chuck Lever
2023-08-02  0:07     ` Jeff Layton
2023-08-02 16:29 ` dai.ngo [this message]
2023-08-02 18:15   ` Jeff Layton
2023-08-02 18:25     ` Chuck Lever III
2023-08-02 20:15     ` dai.ngo
2023-08-02 20:48       ` Jeff Layton
2023-08-02 20:57         ` Chuck Lever III
2023-08-02 21:13           ` Jeff Layton
2023-08-02 21:26             ` dai.ngo
2023-08-02 21:22           ` dai.ngo
2023-08-02 21:32             ` dai.ngo
2023-08-02 21:52               ` Jeff Layton
     [not found]                 ` <3dad0420-11b5-6e6a-a1ae-72970fbfdb34@oracle.com>
2023-08-03 11:27                   ` Jeff Layton
2023-08-03 17:01                     ` dai.ngo

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=8c3adfce-39f0-0e60-e35a-2f1be6fb67e6@oracle.com \
    --to=dai.ngo@oracle.com \
    --cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
    --cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
    --cc=kolga@netapp.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --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