From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SUNRPC: Allow one callback request to be received from
 two sk_buff
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 18:27:19 +0400
Message-ID: <52DD3247.6090108@cogentembedded.com>
References: <n> <1390201154-20815-1-git-send-email-shaobingqing@bwstor.com.cn>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
To: shaobingqing <shaobingqing@bwstor.com.cn>,
	trond.myklebust@primarydata.com, bfields@redhat.com,
	davem@davemloft.net
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <1390201154-20815-1-git-send-email-shaobingqing@bwstor.com.cn>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

Hello.

On 20-01-2014 10:59, shaobingqing wrote:

> In current code, there only one struct rpc_rqst is prealloced. If one
> callback request is received from two sk_buff, the xprt_alloc_bc_request
> would be execute two times with the same transport->xid. The first time
> xprt_alloc_bc_request will alloc one struct rpc_rqst and the TCP_RCV_COPY_DATA
> bit of transport->tcp_flags will not be cleared. The second time
> xprt_alloc_bc_request could not alloc struct rpc_rqst any more and NULL
> pointer will be returned, then xprt_force_disconnect occur. I think one
> callback request can be allowed to be received from two sk_buff.

> Signed-off-by: shaobingqing <shaobingqing@bwstor.com.cn>
> ---
>   net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c |   11 +++++++++--
>   1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

> diff --git a/net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c b/net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c
> index ee03d35..606950d 100644
> --- a/net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c
> +++ b/net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c
[...]
> @@ -1297,7 +1303,8 @@ static inline int xs_tcp_read_callback(struct rpc_xprt *xprt,
>   		list_add(&req->rq_bc_list, &bc_serv->sv_cb_list);
>   		spin_unlock(&bc_serv->sv_cb_lock);
>   		wake_up(&bc_serv->sv_cb_waitq);
> -	}
> +	} else
> +		req_partial = req;

    {} is needed in the *else* branch since it's already used in another 
branch of *if* -- see Documentation/CodingStyle.

WBR, Sergei