From: Xuewei Zhang <xueweiz@google.com>
To: Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@redhat.com>
Cc: bfields@fieldses.org, Grigor Avagyan <grigora@google.com>,
Trevor Bourget <bourget@google.com>,
Nauman Rafique <nauman@google.com>,
trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com, anna.schumaker@netapp.com,
jlayton@kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lockd: Show pid of lockd for remote locks
Date: Sat, 18 May 2019 19:15:32 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPtwhKoF0XTuFa5msGB_eiiwRcJA0kK7eu6Rw6-b-5+8Qy0DDw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3A924C3F-A161-4EE2-A74E-2EE1B6D2CA14@redhat.com>
On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 5:09 AM Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 17 May 2019, at 17:45, Xuewei Zhang wrote:
> > Seems this patch introduced a bug in how lock protocol handles
> > GRANTED_MSG in nfs.
>
> Yes, you're right: it's broken, and broken badly because we find conflicting
> locks based on lockd's fl_pid and lockd's fl_owner, which is current->files.
> That means that clients are not differentiated, and that means that v3 locks
> are broken.
Thanks a lot for the quick response and confirming the problem!
>
> I'd really like to see the fl_pid value make sense on the server when we
> show it to userspace, so I think that we should stuff the svid in fl_owner.
>
> Clearly I need to be more careful making changes here, so I am going to take
> my time fixing this, and I won't get to it until Monday. A revert would get
> us back to safe behavior.
From my limited understanding, b8eee0e90f97 ("lockd: Show pid of lockd
for remote locks")
exists only for fixing lockd in 9d5b86ac13c5 ("fs/locks: Remove
fl_nspid and use fs-specific...").
But I don't see anything wrong in 9d5b86ac13c5 ("fs/locks: Remove
fl_nspid and use fs-specific..."). Could you let me know what's the
problem? Thanks a lot!
If 9d5b86ac13c5 ("fs/locks: Remove fl_nspid and use fs-specific...")
is correct, we
probably don't need to add another fixing patch. Perhaps reverting b8eee0e90f97
("lockd: Show pid of lockd for remote locks") would be the best way then.
>
> Ben
Best regards,
Xuewei
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-19 2:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-17 21:45 Re: [PATCH] lockd: Show pid of lockd for remote locks Xuewei Zhang
2019-05-18 12:09 ` Benjamin Coddington
2019-05-19 2:15 ` Xuewei Zhang [this message]
2019-05-20 13:12 ` Benjamin Coddington
2019-05-20 14:22 ` Benjamin Coddington
2019-05-20 20:51 ` J. Bruce Fields
2019-05-21 11:18 ` Benjamin Coddington
2019-05-21 14:49 ` J. Bruce Fields
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-11-01 17:39 Benjamin Coddington
2018-11-02 18:45 ` J. Bruce Fields
2018-12-14 17:50 ` J. Bruce Fields
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=CAPtwhKoF0XTuFa5msGB_eiiwRcJA0kK7eu6Rw6-b-5+8Qy0DDw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=xueweiz@google.com \
--cc=anna.schumaker@netapp.com \
--cc=bcodding@redhat.com \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=bourget@google.com \
--cc=grigora@google.com \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nauman@google.com \
--cc=trond.myklebust@hammerspace.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).