Before nfs41 client's RECLAIM_COMPLETE done, nfs server should
deny it's new lock.
Signed-off-by: Mi Jinlong <[email protected]>
---
fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 9 +++++++++
1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
index 4b36ec3..43cda94 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
@@ -3803,6 +3803,15 @@ nfsd4_lock(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
*/
struct nfs4_stateid *open_stp = NULL;
+ /*
+ * RFC5661 18.51.3
+ * Before RECLAIM_COMPLETE done, return NFS4ERR_GRACE
+ */
+ status = nfserr_grace;
+ if (nfsd4_has_session(cstate) &&
+ !cstate->session->se_client->cl_firststate)
+ goto out;
+
status = nfserr_stale_clientid;
if (!nfsd4_has_session(cstate) &&
STALE_CLIENTID(&lock->lk_new_clientid))
--
1.7.4.1
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:12:00AM +0800, Mi Jinlong wrote:
> Before nfs41 client's RECLAIM_COMPLETE done, nfs server should
> deny it's new lock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mi Jinlong <[email protected]>
Is nfserr_grace the right error? (Honest question, I haven't looked it
up.)
Also I'd think this check should go in nfsd4_open: opens are also
prohibited before RECLAIM_COMPLETE, and if we check there then we don't
need to check here, as you have to have open state before you can do a
lock.
--b.
> ---
> fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 9 +++++++++
> 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> index 4b36ec3..43cda94 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> @@ -3803,6 +3803,15 @@ nfsd4_lock(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
> */
> struct nfs4_stateid *open_stp = NULL;
>
> + /*
> + * RFC5661 18.51.3
> + * Before RECLAIM_COMPLETE done, return NFS4ERR_GRACE
> + */
> + status = nfserr_grace;
> + if (nfsd4_has_session(cstate) &&
> + !cstate->session->se_client->cl_firststate)
> + goto out;
> +
> status = nfserr_stale_clientid;
> if (!nfsd4_has_session(cstate) &&
> STALE_CLIENTID(&lock->lk_new_clientid))
> --
> 1.7.4.1
>
>
Mi Jinlong :
> Hi Bruce,
>
> Sorry for so late to reply you.
>
> J. Bruce Fields:
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:12:00AM +0800, Mi Jinlong wrote:
>>> Before nfs41 client's RECLAIM_COMPLETE done, nfs server should
>>> deny it's new lock.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Mi Jinlong <[email protected]>
>> Is nfserr_grace the right error? (Honest question, I haven't looked it
>> up.)
>
> Yes, rfc5661 says:
>
> " Whenever a client establishes a new client ID and before it does the
> first non-reclaim operation that obtains a lock, it MUST send a
> RECLAIM_COMPLETE with rca_one_fs set to FALSE, even if there are no
> locks to reclaim. If non-reclaim locking operations are done before
> the RECLAIM_COMPLETE, an NFS4ERR_GRACE error will be returned. "
>
>> Also I'd think this check should go in nfsd4_open: opens are also
>> prohibited before RECLAIM_COMPLETE, and if we check there then we don't
>> need to check here, as you have to have open state before you can do a
>> lock.
>
> Agree with you, what about the following one??
After this patch, we should add a new patch to pynfs41 test site.
Otherwise, the test site will walk out.
----
thanks
Mi Jinlong
>From baa71190a279f6b35a919088d985482dedf06a71 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mi Jinlong <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 14:14:38 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] CLNT: Send RECLAIM_COMPLETE to server before do 'maketree'
Signed-off-by: Mi Jinlong <[email protected]>
---
nfs4.1/server41tests/environment.py | 4 ++++
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/nfs4.1/server41tests/environment.py b/nfs4.1/server41tests/environment.py
index 4ce7a70..857b29f 100644
--- a/nfs4.1/server41tests/environment.py
+++ b/nfs4.1/server41tests/environment.py
@@ -157,6 +157,10 @@ class Environment(testmod.Environment):
def _maketree(self, sess):
"""Make test tree"""
+ # RECLAIM_COMPLETE
+ res = sess.compound([op.reclaim_complete(FALSE)])
+ check(res)
+
# ensure /tmp (and path leading up) exists
path = []
for comp in self.opts.home:
--
1.7.4.5
Hi Bruce,
Sorry for so late to reply you.
J. Bruce Fields:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:12:00AM +0800, Mi Jinlong wrote:
>> Before nfs41 client's RECLAIM_COMPLETE done, nfs server should
>> deny it's new lock.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mi Jinlong <[email protected]>
>
> Is nfserr_grace the right error? (Honest question, I haven't looked it
> up.)
Yes, rfc5661 says:
" Whenever a client establishes a new client ID and before it does the
first non-reclaim operation that obtains a lock, it MUST send a
RECLAIM_COMPLETE with rca_one_fs set to FALSE, even if there are no
locks to reclaim. If non-reclaim locking operations are done before
the RECLAIM_COMPLETE, an NFS4ERR_GRACE error will be returned. "
>
> Also I'd think this check should go in nfsd4_open: opens are also
> prohibited before RECLAIM_COMPLETE, and if we check there then we don't
> need to check here, as you have to have open state before you can do a
> lock.
Agree with you, what about the following one??
--
----
thanks
Mi Jinlong
===============================