From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , stable@vger.kernel.org, Wangyuan Zhang , Trond Myklebust Subject: [ 42/58] NLM: Ensure that we resend all pending blocking locks after a reclaim Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:19:38 -0800 Message-Id: <20130225221645.405636105@linuxfoundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20130225221636.018756060@linuxfoundation.org> References: <20130225221636.018756060@linuxfoundation.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 3.7-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Trond Myklebust commit 666b3d803a511fbc9bc5e5ea8ce66010cf03ea13 upstream. Currently, nlmclnt_lock will break out of the for(;;) loop when the reclaimer wakes up the blocking lock thread by setting nlm_lck_denied_grace_period. This causes the lock request to fail with an ENOLCK error. The intention was always to ensure that we resend the lock request after the grace period has expired. Reported-by: Wangyuan Zhang Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- fs/lockd/clntproc.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) --- a/fs/lockd/clntproc.c +++ b/fs/lockd/clntproc.c @@ -551,6 +551,9 @@ again: status = nlmclnt_block(block, req, NLMCLNT_POLL_TIMEOUT); if (status < 0) break; + /* Resend the blocking lock request after a server reboot */ + if (resp->status == nlm_lck_denied_grace_period) + continue; if (resp->status != nlm_lck_blocked) break; }