From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de [80.237.130.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05A334C7E for ; Fri, 18 Mar 2022 14:41:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ip4d144895.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de ([77.20.72.149] helo=[192.168.66.200]); authenticated by wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) id 1nVDnV-0001ZP-Uq; Fri, 18 Mar 2022 15:41:46 +0100 Message-ID: <045ed627-e054-a42d-c3ec-e4e44bd1cf81@leemhuis.info> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2022 15:41:45 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: regressions@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH][SMB3] fix multiuser mount regression #forregzbot Content-Language: en-US To: "regressions@lists.linux.dev" References: From: Thorsten Leemhuis In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;regressions@leemhuis.info;1647614508;3203970e; X-HE-SMSGID: 1nVDnV-0001ZP-Uq TWIMC: this mail is primarily send for documentation purposes and for regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot. These mails usually contain '#forregzbot' in the subject, to make them easy to spot and filter. Seems below regression soon will be getting fixed, but with the nearing final I want to have this in the tracking to make sure everyone is aware of it: #regzbot ^introduced 73f9bfbe3d81 #regzbot title cifs: smb3: incorrect session setup check for multiuser mounts #regzbot ignore-activity Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat) P.S.: As the Linux kernel's regression tracker I'm getting a lot of reports on my table. I can only look briefly into most of them and lack knowledge about most of the areas they concern. I thus unfortunately will sometimes get things wrong or miss something important. I hope that's not the case here; if you think it is, don't hesitate to tell me in a public reply, it's in everyone's interest to set the public record straight. On 17.03.22 04:20, Steve French wrote: > cifssmb3: fix incorrect session setup check for multiuser mounts > > A recent change to how the SMB3 server (socket) and session status > is managed regressed multiuser mounts by changing the check > for whether session setup is needed to the socket (TCP_Server_info) > structure instead of the session struct (cifs_ses). Add additional > check in cifs_setup_sesion to fix this. > > Fixes: 73f9bfbe3d81 ("cifs: maintain a state machine for tcp/smb/tcon sessions") > Reported-by: Ronnie Sahlberg > Signed-off-by: Steve French > --- > fs/cifs/connect.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/cifs/connect.c b/fs/cifs/connect.c > index 053cb449eb16..d3020abfe404 100644 > --- a/fs/cifs/connect.c > +++ b/fs/cifs/connect.c > @@ -3924,7 +3924,8 @@ cifs_setup_session(const unsigned int xid, > struct cifs_ses *ses, > > /* only send once per connect */ > spin_lock(&cifs_tcp_ses_lock); > - if (server->tcpStatus != CifsNeedSessSetup) { > + if ((server->tcpStatus != CifsNeedSessSetup) && > + (ses->status == CifsGood)) { > spin_unlock(&cifs_tcp_ses_lock); > return 0; > } >