linux-cifs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com>
To: "Steve French" <smfrench@gmail.com>,
	"Aurélien Aptel" <aaptel@suse.com>,
	"Shyam Prasad N" <nspmangalore@gmail.com>
Cc: CIFS <linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][SMB3] 3 small multichannel client patches
Date: Sat, 8 May 2021 09:29:13 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <98a3e99b-3d2e-0480-55db-f843c7016351@talpey.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAH2r5mu3m6FWWqrfOeQugXWGZOPiEE+Xgk8wc0rn8OgLRVPSWQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 5/7/2021 9:13 PM, Steve French wrote:
> 1) we were not setting CAP_MULTICHANNEL on negotiate request

> diff --git a/fs/cifs/smb2pdu.c b/fs/cifs/smb2pdu.c
> index e36c2a867783..a8bf43184773 100644
> --- a/fs/cifs/smb2pdu.c
> +++ b/fs/cifs/smb2pdu.c
> @@ -841,6 +841,8 @@ SMB2_negotiate(const unsigned int xid, struct cifs_ses *ses)
>  		req->SecurityMode = 0;
>  
>  	req->Capabilities = cpu_to_le32(server->vals->req_capabilities);
> +	if (ses->chan_max > 1)
> +		req->Capabilities |= cpu_to_le32(SMB2_GLOBAL_CAP_MULTI_CHANNEL);
>  
>  	/* ClientGUID must be zero for SMB2.02 dialect */
>  	if (server->vals->protocol_id == SMB20_PROT_ID)
> @@ -1032,6 +1034,9 @@ int smb3_validate_negotiate(const unsigned int xid, struct cifs_tcon *tcon)
>  
>  	pneg_inbuf->Capabilities =
>  			cpu_to_le32(server->vals->req_capabilities);
> +	if (tcon->ses->chan_max > 1)
> +		pneg_inbuf->Capabilities |= cpu_to_le32(SMB2_GLOBAL_CAP_MULTI_CHANNEL);
> +

This doesn't look quite right, and it can lead to failed negotiate by
setting CAP_MULTI_CHANNEL when the server didn't actually send the bit.
Have you tested this with servers that don't do multichannel?


> 2) we were ignoring whether the server set CAP_NEGOTIATE in the response

Is this "CAP_NEGOTIATE" a typo? I think you mean CAP_MULTI_CHANNEL.
In any case:

> diff --git a/fs/cifs/sess.c b/fs/cifs/sess.c
> index 63d517b9f2ff..a391ca3166f3 100644
> --- a/fs/cifs/sess.c
> +++ b/fs/cifs/sess.c
> @@ -97,6 +97,12 @@ int cifs_try_adding_channels(struct cifs_sb_info *cifs_sb, struct cifs_ses *ses)
>  		return 0;
>  	}
>  
> +	if ((ses->server->capabilities & SMB2_GLOBAL_CAP_MULTI_CHANNEL) == false) {

This compares a bit to a boolean. "false" should be "0"?

> +		cifs_dbg(VFS, "server does not support CAP_MULTI_CHANNEL, multichannel disabled\n");

The wording could be clearer. Technically speaking, the server does not
support _multichannel_, which it indicated by not setting CAP_MULTI_CHANNEL.
Also, wouldn't it be more useful to add the servername to this message?
	"server %s does not support multichannel, using single channel"
or similar.


> 3) we were silently ignoring multichannel when "max_channels" was > 1
> but the user forgot to include "multichannel" in mount line.

 > diff --git a/fs/cifs/fs_context.c b/fs/cifs/fs_context.c
 > index 3bcf881c3ae9..8f7af6fcdc76 100644
 > --- a/fs/cifs/fs_context.c
 > +++ b/fs/cifs/fs_context.c
 > @@ -1021,6 +1021,9 @@ static int smb3_fs_context_parse_param(struct 
fs_context *fc,
 >  			goto cifs_parse_mount_err;
 >  		}
 >  		ctx->max_channels = result.uint_32;
 > +		/* If more than one channel requested ... they want multichan */
 > +		if ((ctx->multichannel == false) && (result.uint_32 > 1))
 > +			ctx->multichannel = true;

Wouldn't this be clearer and simpler as just "if (result.uint32 > 1)" ?

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-05-08 13:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-08  1:13 [PATCH][SMB3] 3 small multichannel client patches Steve French
2021-05-08 12:30 ` Shyam Prasad N
2021-05-08 13:29 ` Tom Talpey [this message]
2021-05-08 15:10   ` Steve French
2021-05-08 15:20     ` Tom Talpey
2021-05-08 15:51       ` Steve French
2021-05-11 15:53 ` Aurélien Aptel

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=98a3e99b-3d2e-0480-55db-f843c7016351@talpey.com \
    --to=tom@talpey.com \
    --cc=aaptel@suse.com \
    --cc=linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nspmangalore@gmail.com \
    --cc=smfrench@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).