Message-ID: <1512706738.18523.236.camel@codethink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 29/49] nfs: Dont take a reference on fl->fl_file for
 LOCK operation
From: Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@redhat.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>,
        Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@primarydata.com>,
        Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@verizon.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2017 04:18:58 +0000
In-Reply-To: <20171207124707.826264155@linuxfoundation.org>
References: <20171207124703.742654162@linuxfoundation.org>
         <20171207124707.826264155@linuxfoundation.org>
Organization: Codethink Ltd.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1060
Lines: 30

On Thu, 2017-12-07 at 14:07 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> 4.4-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
> 
> ------------------
> 
> From: Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@redhat.com>
> 
> 
> [ Upstream commit 4b09ec4b14a168bf2c687e1f598140c3c11e9222 ]
> 
> I have reports of a crash that look like __fput() was called twice for
> a NFSv4.0 file.  It seems possible that the state manager could try to
> reclaim a lock and take a reference on the fl->fl_file at the same time the
> file is being released if, during the close(), a signal interrupts the wait
> for outstanding IO while removing locks which then skips the removal
> of that lock.
> 
> Since 83bfff23e9ed ("nfs4: have do_vfs_lock take an inode pointer") has
> removed the need to traverse fl->fl_file->f_inode in nfs4_lock_done(),
> taking that reference is no longer necessary.
[...]

No objection to this in 4.4, but that other commit only went into 4.2
so this fix doesn't look suitable for 3.18.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Software Developer, Codethink Ltd.