From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Shirish Pargaonkar Subject: Re: [PATCH] Complete oplock break jobs before closing file handle Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2015 07:45:13 -0600 Message-ID: References: <1421324524-2524-1-git-send-email-sprabhu@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: linux-cifs To: Sachin Prabhu Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1421324524-2524-1-git-send-email-sprabhu-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-cifs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 6:22 AM, Sachin Prabhu wrote: > Commit > c11f1df5003d534fd067f0168bfad7befffb3b5c > requires writers to wait for any pending oplock break handler to > complete before proceeding to write. This is done by waiting on bit > CIFS_INODE_PENDING_OPLOCK_BREAK in cifsFileInfo->flags. This bit is > cleared by the oplock break handler job queued on the workqueue once it > has completed handling the oplock break allowing writers to proceed with > writing to the file. > > While testing, it was noticed that the filehandle could be closed while > there is a pending oplock break which results in the oplock break > handler on the cifsiod workqueue being cancelled before it has had a > chance to execute and clear the CIFS_INODE_PENDING_OPLOCK_BREAK bit. > Any subsequent attempt to write to this file hangs waiting for the > CIFS_INODE_PENDING_OPLOCK_BREAK bit to be cleared. > > We fix this by ensuring that we also clear the bit > CIFS_INODE_PENDING_OPLOCK_BREAK when we remove the oplock break handler > from the workqueue. > > The bug was found by Red Hat QA while testing using ltp's fsstress > command. > > Signed-off-by: Sachin Prabhu > Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton > --- > fs/cifs/file.c | 6 +++++- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/cifs/file.c b/fs/cifs/file.c > index 96b7e9b..74f1287 100644 > --- a/fs/cifs/file.c > +++ b/fs/cifs/file.c > @@ -366,6 +366,7 @@ void cifsFileInfo_put(struct cifsFileInfo *cifs_file) > struct cifsLockInfo *li, *tmp; > struct cifs_fid fid; > struct cifs_pending_open open; > + bool oplock_break_cancelled; > > spin_lock(&cifs_file_list_lock); > if (--cifs_file->count > 0) { > @@ -397,7 +398,7 @@ void cifsFileInfo_put(struct cifsFileInfo *cifs_file) > } > spin_unlock(&cifs_file_list_lock); > > - cancel_work_sync(&cifs_file->oplock_break); > + oplock_break_cancelled = cancel_work_sync(&cifs_file->oplock_break); > > if (!tcon->need_reconnect && !cifs_file->invalidHandle) { > struct TCP_Server_Info *server = tcon->ses->server; > @@ -409,6 +410,9 @@ void cifsFileInfo_put(struct cifsFileInfo *cifs_file) > _free_xid(xid); > } > > + if (oplock_break_cancelled) > + cifs_done_oplock_break(cifsi); > + > cifs_del_pending_open(&open); > > /* > -- > 2.1.0 > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in > the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Does it matter what cancel_work_sync() returns? Should cifs_done_oplock_break(cifsi); be called unconditionally? Also, should this also to go stable?