From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6E1DC10F02 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 20:09:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4C71222BE for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 20:09:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2389742AbfBOUJj (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Feb 2019 15:09:39 -0500 Received: from fieldses.org ([173.255.197.46]:39644 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726317AbfBOUJj (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Feb 2019 15:09:39 -0500 Received: by fieldses.org (Postfix, from userid 2815) id 076B8BD3; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 15:09:38 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 15:09:38 -0500 From: "J. Bruce Fields" To: Amir Goldstein Cc: Jeff Layton , Volker.Lendecke@sernet.de, samba-technical@lists.samba.org, Linux NFS Mailing List , linux-fsdevel , Pavel Shilovsky Subject: Re: Better interop for NFS/SMB file share mode/reservation Message-ID: <20190215200938.GC22354@fieldses.org> References: <379106947f859bdf5db4c6f9c4ab8c44f7423c08.camel@kernel.org> <20190208155052.GB20573@fieldses.org> <20190208201649.GA23657@fieldses.org> <20190214205100.GB9216@fieldses.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 09:31:48AM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 10:51 PM J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > > > On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 10:31:07PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 10:17 PM J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > > > On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 10:02:43PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 5:51 PM J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 04:45:46PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > > > > > > - check_conflicting_open() is changed to use inode_is_open_for_read() > > > > > > > instead of checking d_count and i_count. > > > > > > > > > > > > Independently of the rest, I'd love to do away with those > > > > > > d_count/i_count checks. What's inode_is_open_for_read()? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It would look maybe something like this: > > > > > > > > > > static inline bool file_is_open_for_read(const struct inode *file) > > > > > { > > > > > struct inode *inode = file_inode(file); > > > > > int countself = (file->f_mode & (FMODE_READ | FMODE_WRITE)) == > > > > > FMODE_READ) ? 1 : 0; > > > > > > > > > > return atomic_read(&inode->i_readcount) > countself; > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > And it would allow for acquiring F_WRLCK lease if other > > > > > instances of inode are open O_PATH. > > > > > A slight change of semantics that seems harmless(?) > > > > > and will allow some flexibility. > > > > > > > > How did I not know about i_readcount? (Looking) I guess it would mean > > > > adding some dependence on CONFIG_IMA, hm. > > > > > > > > > > Yes, or we remove ifdef CONFIG_IMA from i_readcount. > > > I am not sure if the concern was size of struct inode > > > (shouldn't increase on 64bit arch) or the accounting on > > > open/close. The impact doesn't look significant (?).. > > > > Looks like the original patch was d984ea604943bb "fs: move i_readcount". > > I did some googling around and looked at the discussion summarized by > > https://lwn.net/Articles/410895/ but can't find useful discussion of > > i_readcount impact. > > > > Looks like CONFIG_IMA is on in Fedora and RHEL, for what it's worth. > > > > Maybe something like this? > > > > --b. > > > > commit 02cfda99ed8c > > Author: J. Bruce Fields > > Date: Thu Feb 14 15:02:02 2019 -0500 > > > > locks: use i_readcount to detect lease conflicts > > > > The lease code currently uses the inode and dentry refcounts to detect > > whether someone has a file open for read. This seems fragile. Use > > i_readcount instead. > > > > Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields > > > > diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c > > index ff6af2c32601..299abad65545 100644 > > --- a/fs/locks.c > > +++ b/fs/locks.c > > @@ -1769,8 +1769,7 @@ check_conflicting_open(const struct dentry *dentry, const long arg, int flags) > > if ((arg == F_RDLCK) && inode_is_open_for_write(inode)) > > return -EAGAIN; > > > > - if ((arg == F_WRLCK) && ((d_count(dentry) > 1) || > > - (atomic_read(&inode->i_count) > 1))) > > + if ((arg == F_WRLCK) && (atomic_read(&inode->i_readcount) > 1)) > > ret = -EAGAIN; > > Alas, i_readcount is not the count of file opens for read, it is the count > of file opens O_RDONLY, so this is incorrect wrt conflict with other writers. Whoops, thanks! > I guess since there is a full smp_mb() before this check, then you > can check (i_readcount + i_writecount) > 1 || (i_writecount < 0) > > You can also check if caller itself is O_RDONLY to know if self > count is expect to be in i_readcount or i_writecount, but not sure > it is worth the trouble. I don't know, it still looks reasonable. I'll fool around with it. --b.