Bruce, following are half a dozen patches
from the nfs41/pnfs tree
git://linux-nfs.org/~bhalevy/linux-pnfs.git nfsd-for-2.6.29
[PATCH 1/6] nfsd: add etoosmall to nfserrno
[PATCH 2/6] nfsd: dprint each op status in nfsd4_proc_compound
[PATCH 3/6] nfsd: git rid of nfs4_cb_null_ops declaration
[PATCH 4/6] nfsd: delete wrong file comment from nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
[PATCH 5/6] nfsd: last_byte_offset
[PATCH 6/6] nfsd: get rid of NFSD_VERSION
Benny
From: Dean Hildebrand <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Dean Hildebrand <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Benny Halevy <[email protected]>
---
fs/nfsd/nfsproc.c | 1 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfsproc.c b/fs/nfsd/nfsproc.c
index 5cffeca..6f7f263 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfsproc.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfsproc.c
@@ -622,6 +622,7 @@ nfserrno (int errno)
{ nfserr_badname, -ESRCH },
{ nfserr_io, -ETXTBSY },
{ nfserr_notsupp, -EOPNOTSUPP },
+ { nfserr_toosmall, -ETOOSMALL },
};
int i;
--
1.6.0.2
Signed-off-by: Benny Halevy <[email protected]>
---
fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c | 5 +++++
1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c
index 669461e..9fa60a3 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c
@@ -946,6 +946,11 @@ encode_op:
nfsd4_encode_operation(resp, op);
status = op->status;
}
+
+ dprintk("nfsv4 compound op %p opcnt %d #%d: %d: status %d\n",
+ args->ops, args->opcnt, resp->opcnt, op->opnum,
+ be32_to_cpu(status));
+
if (cstate->replay_owner) {
nfs4_put_stateowner(cstate->replay_owner);
cstate->replay_owner = NULL;
--
1.6.0.2
There's no use for nfs4_cb_null_ops's declaration in fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c
Signed-off-by: Benny Halevy <[email protected]>
---
fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c | 3 ---
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c
index 094747a..e198ead 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c
@@ -53,9 +53,6 @@
#define NFSPROC4_CB_NULL 0
#define NFSPROC4_CB_COMPOUND 1
-/* declarations */
-static const struct rpc_call_ops nfs4_cb_null_ops;
-
/* Index of predefined Linux callback client operations */
enum {
--
1.6.0.2
From: Marc Eshel <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Benny Halevy <[email protected]>
---
fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c | 2 --
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
index afcdf4b..f65953b 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
@@ -1,6 +1,4 @@
/*
- * fs/nfs/nfs4xdr.c
- *
* Server-side XDR for NFSv4
*
* Copyright (c) 2002 The Regents of the University of Michigan.
--
1.6.0.2
refactor the nfs4 server lock code to use last_byte_offset
to compute the last byte covered by the lock. Check for overflow
so that the last byte is set to NFS4_MAX_UINT64 if offset + len
wraps around.
Also, use NFS4_MAX_UINT64 for ~(u64)0 where appropriate.
Signed-off-by: Benny Halevy <[email protected]>
---
fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
include/linux/nfs4.h | 2 ++
2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
index 977ef84..1835538 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
@@ -2404,6 +2404,26 @@ out:
#define LOCK_HASH_SIZE (1 << LOCK_HASH_BITS)
#define LOCK_HASH_MASK (LOCK_HASH_SIZE - 1)
+static inline u64
+end_offset(u64 start, u64 len)
+{
+ u64 end;
+
+ end = start + len;
+ return end >= start ? end: NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
+}
+
+/* last octet in a range */
+static inline u64
+last_byte_offset(u64 start, u64 len)
+{
+ u64 end;
+
+ BUG_ON(!len);
+ end = start + len;
+ return end > start ? end - 1: NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
+}
+
#define lockownerid_hashval(id) \
((id) & LOCK_HASH_MASK)
@@ -2506,8 +2526,8 @@ nfs4_set_lock_denied(struct file_lock *fl, struct nfsd4_lock_denied *deny)
deny->ld_clientid.cl_id = 0;
}
deny->ld_start = fl->fl_start;
- deny->ld_length = ~(u64)0;
- if (fl->fl_end != ~(u64)0)
+ deny->ld_length = NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
+ if (fl->fl_end != NFS4_MAX_UINT64)
deny->ld_length = fl->fl_end - fl->fl_start + 1;
deny->ld_type = NFS4_READ_LT;
if (fl->fl_type != F_RDLCK)
@@ -2604,7 +2624,7 @@ out:
static int
check_lock_length(u64 offset, u64 length)
{
- return ((length == 0) || ((length != ~(u64)0) &&
+ return ((length == 0) || ((length != NFS4_MAX_UINT64) &&
LOFF_OVERFLOW(offset, length)));
}
@@ -2724,11 +2744,7 @@ nfsd4_lock(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
file_lock.fl_lmops = &nfsd_posix_mng_ops;
file_lock.fl_start = lock->lk_offset;
- if ((lock->lk_length == ~(u64)0) ||
- LOFF_OVERFLOW(lock->lk_offset, lock->lk_length))
- file_lock.fl_end = ~(u64)0;
- else
- file_lock.fl_end = lock->lk_offset + lock->lk_length - 1;
+ file_lock.fl_end = last_byte_offset(lock->lk_offset, lock->lk_length);
nfs4_transform_lock_offset(&file_lock);
/*
@@ -2827,10 +2843,7 @@ nfsd4_lockt(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
file_lock.fl_lmops = &nfsd_posix_mng_ops;
file_lock.fl_start = lockt->lt_offset;
- if ((lockt->lt_length == ~(u64)0) || LOFF_OVERFLOW(lockt->lt_offset, lockt->lt_length))
- file_lock.fl_end = ~(u64)0;
- else
- file_lock.fl_end = lockt->lt_offset + lockt->lt_length - 1;
+ file_lock.fl_end = last_byte_offset(lockt->lt_offset, lockt->lt_length);
nfs4_transform_lock_offset(&file_lock);
@@ -2894,10 +2907,7 @@ nfsd4_locku(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
file_lock.fl_lmops = &nfsd_posix_mng_ops;
file_lock.fl_start = locku->lu_offset;
- if ((locku->lu_length == ~(u64)0) || LOFF_OVERFLOW(locku->lu_offset, locku->lu_length))
- file_lock.fl_end = ~(u64)0;
- else
- file_lock.fl_end = locku->lu_offset + locku->lu_length - 1;
+ file_lock.fl_end = last_byte_offset(locku->lu_offset, locku->lu_length);
nfs4_transform_lock_offset(&file_lock);
/*
diff --git a/include/linux/nfs4.h b/include/linux/nfs4.h
index ea03667..b912311 100644
--- a/include/linux/nfs4.h
+++ b/include/linux/nfs4.h
@@ -88,6 +88,8 @@
#define NFS4_ACE_GENERIC_EXECUTE 0x001200A0
#define NFS4_ACE_MASK_ALL 0x001F01FF
+#define NFS4_MAX_UINT64 (~(u64)0)
+
enum nfs4_acl_whotype {
NFS4_ACL_WHO_NAMED = 0,
NFS4_ACL_WHO_OWNER,
--
1.6.0.2
Signed-off-by: Benny Halevy <[email protected]>
---
include/linux/nfsd/nfsd.h | 1 -
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/nfsd/nfsd.h b/include/linux/nfsd/nfsd.h
index 2126940..e19f459 100644
--- a/include/linux/nfsd/nfsd.h
+++ b/include/linux/nfsd/nfsd.h
@@ -23,7 +23,6 @@
/*
* nfsd version
*/
-#define NFSD_VERSION "0.5"
#define NFSD_SUPPORTED_MINOR_VERSION 0
/*
--
1.6.0.2
Hi Benny-
On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:42 PM, Benny Halevy wrote:
> refactor the nfs4 server lock code to use last_byte_offset
> to compute the last byte covered by the lock. Check for overflow
> so that the last byte is set to NFS4_MAX_UINT64 if offset + len
> wraps around.
>
> Also, use NFS4_MAX_UINT64 for ~(u64)0 where appropriate.
Comments below are more about the existing code than your patch.
> Signed-off-by: Benny Halevy <[email protected]>
> ---
> fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> include/linux/nfs4.h | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> index 977ef84..1835538 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> @@ -2404,6 +2404,26 @@ out:
> #define LOCK_HASH_SIZE (1 << LOCK_HASH_BITS)
> #define LOCK_HASH_MASK (LOCK_HASH_SIZE - 1)
>
> +static inline u64
> +end_offset(u64 start, u64 len)
> +{
> + u64 end;
> +
> + end = start + len;
> + return end >= start ? end: NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
> +}
> +
> +/* last octet in a range */
> +static inline u64
> +last_byte_offset(u64 start, u64 len)
> +{
> + u64 end;
> +
> + BUG_ON(!len);
> + end = start + len;
> + return end > start ? end - 1: NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
> +}
> +
> #define lockownerid_hashval(id) \
> ((id) & LOCK_HASH_MASK)
>
> @@ -2506,8 +2526,8 @@ nfs4_set_lock_denied(struct file_lock *fl,
> struct nfsd4_lock_denied *deny)
> deny->ld_clientid.cl_id = 0;
> }
> deny->ld_start = fl->fl_start;
> - deny->ld_length = ~(u64)0;
> - if (fl->fl_end != ~(u64)0)
> + deny->ld_length = NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
> + if (fl->fl_end != NFS4_MAX_UINT64)
Someone more expert with the locking code than I am should comment on
this... but fl_end is a loff_t (long long) -- not a u64. The check
here should be for OFFSET_MAX, just like it is in lockd, right? Is
"long long" the same width on all hardware architectures?
> deny->ld_length = fl->fl_end - fl->fl_start + 1;
> deny->ld_type = NFS4_READ_LT;
> if (fl->fl_type != F_RDLCK)
> @@ -2604,7 +2624,7 @@ out:
> static int
> check_lock_length(u64 offset, u64 length)
> {
> - return ((length == 0) || ((length != ~(u64)0) &&
> + return ((length == 0) || ((length != NFS4_MAX_UINT64) &&
> LOFF_OVERFLOW(offset, length)));
> }
>
> @@ -2724,11 +2744,7 @@ nfsd4_lock(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct
> nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
> file_lock.fl_lmops = &nfsd_posix_mng_ops;
>
> file_lock.fl_start = lock->lk_offset;
> - if ((lock->lk_length == ~(u64)0) ||
> - LOFF_OVERFLOW(lock->lk_offset, lock->lk_length))
> - file_lock.fl_end = ~(u64)0;
> - else
> - file_lock.fl_end = lock->lk_offset + lock->lk_length - 1;
> + file_lock.fl_end = last_byte_offset(lock->lk_offset, lock-
> >lk_length);
Likewise, I think for proper interoperation with our VFS locking code,
last_byte_offset should return a loff_t, and use OFFSET_MAX, not
NFS4_MAX_UINT64 for the "biggest value I can think of" return.
This is a common issue for NFS -- the NFS/NLM wire data types for lock
range values are u32 and u64, but Linux's internal types are
loff_t's. Our XDR code should manage this conversion and check that
the incoming lock ranges can be supported by the implementation.
We don't actually have any unit test cases that check the behavior of
this code around the file size and lock range maxima.
> nfs4_transform_lock_offset(&file_lock);
>
> /*
> @@ -2827,10 +2843,7 @@ nfsd4_lockt(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct
> nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
> file_lock.fl_lmops = &nfsd_posix_mng_ops;
>
> file_lock.fl_start = lockt->lt_offset;
> - if ((lockt->lt_length == ~(u64)0) || LOFF_OVERFLOW(lockt-
> >lt_offset, lockt->lt_length))
> - file_lock.fl_end = ~(u64)0;
> - else
> - file_lock.fl_end = lockt->lt_offset + lockt->lt_length - 1;
> + file_lock.fl_end = last_byte_offset(lockt->lt_offset, lockt-
> >lt_length);
>
> nfs4_transform_lock_offset(&file_lock);
>
> @@ -2894,10 +2907,7 @@ nfsd4_locku(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct
> nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
> file_lock.fl_lmops = &nfsd_posix_mng_ops;
> file_lock.fl_start = locku->lu_offset;
>
> - if ((locku->lu_length == ~(u64)0) || LOFF_OVERFLOW(locku-
> >lu_offset, locku->lu_length))
> - file_lock.fl_end = ~(u64)0;
> - else
> - file_lock.fl_end = locku->lu_offset + locku->lu_length - 1;
> + file_lock.fl_end = last_byte_offset(locku->lu_offset, locku-
> >lu_length);
> nfs4_transform_lock_offset(&file_lock);
>
> /*
> diff --git a/include/linux/nfs4.h b/include/linux/nfs4.h
> index ea03667..b912311 100644
> --- a/include/linux/nfs4.h
> +++ b/include/linux/nfs4.h
> @@ -88,6 +88,8 @@
> #define NFS4_ACE_GENERIC_EXECUTE 0x001200A0
> #define NFS4_ACE_MASK_ALL 0x001F01FF
>
> +#define NFS4_MAX_UINT64 (~(u64)0)
> +
> enum nfs4_acl_whotype {
> NFS4_ACL_WHO_NAMED = 0,
> NFS4_ACL_WHO_OWNER,
--
Chuck Lever
chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com
Chuck Lever wrote:
> Hi Benny-
>
> On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:42 PM, Benny Halevy wrote:
>> refactor the nfs4 server lock code to use last_byte_offset
>> to compute the last byte covered by the lock. Check for overflow
>> so that the last byte is set to NFS4_MAX_UINT64 if offset + len
>> wraps around.
>>
>> Also, use NFS4_MAX_UINT64 for ~(u64)0 where appropriate.
>
> Comments below are more about the existing code than your patch.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Benny Halevy <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>> include/linux/nfs4.h | 2 ++
>> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
>> index 977ef84..1835538 100644
>> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
>> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
>> @@ -2404,6 +2404,26 @@ out:
>> #define LOCK_HASH_SIZE (1 << LOCK_HASH_BITS)
>> #define LOCK_HASH_MASK (LOCK_HASH_SIZE - 1)
>>
>> +static inline u64
>> +end_offset(u64 start, u64 len)
>> +{
>> + u64 end;
>> +
>> + end = start + len;
>> + return end >= start ? end: NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* last octet in a range */
>> +static inline u64
>> +last_byte_offset(u64 start, u64 len)
>> +{
>> + u64 end;
>> +
>> + BUG_ON(!len);
>> + end = start + len;
>> + return end > start ? end - 1: NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
>> +}
>> +
>> #define lockownerid_hashval(id) \
>> ((id) & LOCK_HASH_MASK)
>>
>> @@ -2506,8 +2526,8 @@ nfs4_set_lock_denied(struct file_lock *fl,
>> struct nfsd4_lock_denied *deny)
>> deny->ld_clientid.cl_id = 0;
>> }
>> deny->ld_start = fl->fl_start;
>> - deny->ld_length = ~(u64)0;
>> - if (fl->fl_end != ~(u64)0)
>> + deny->ld_length = NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
>> + if (fl->fl_end != NFS4_MAX_UINT64)
>
> Someone more expert with the locking code than I am should comment on
> this... but fl_end is a loff_t (long long) -- not a u64. The check
> here should be for OFFSET_MAX, just like it is in lockd, right? Is
Yes. I think you're right.
nfsd4_lock calls nfs4_transform_lock_offset right after
setting fl_end = last_byte_offset()
and nfs4_transform_lock_offset "truncates" the lock to
OFFSET_MAX.
That said, I wonder if we shouldn't return NFS4ERR_BAD_RANGE
in nfsd4_lock lock->lk_length != NFS4_MAX_UINT64 &&
last_byte_offset(lock->lk_offset, lock->lk_length) > (u64)OFFSET_MAX.
(or just != file_lock.fl_end after nfs4_transform_lock_offset)
The problem is that rfc3530 seems to refer only to 32-bit wide lock
ranges and not to signed offsets.
Some servers may only support locking for byte offsets that fit
within 32 bits. If the client specifies a range that includes a byte
beyond the last byte offset of the 32-bit range, but does not include
the last byte offset of the 32-bit and all of the byte offsets beyond
it, up to the end of the valid 64-bit range, such a 32-bit server
MUST return the error NFS4ERR_BAD_RANGE.
> "long long" the same width on all hardware architectures?
I think so. But even if it is, I don't know if that's just
by chance or by design...
>
>> deny->ld_length = fl->fl_end - fl->fl_start + 1;
>> deny->ld_type = NFS4_READ_LT;
>> if (fl->fl_type != F_RDLCK)
>> @@ -2604,7 +2624,7 @@ out:
>> static int
>> check_lock_length(u64 offset, u64 length)
>> {
>> - return ((length == 0) || ((length != ~(u64)0) &&
>> + return ((length == 0) || ((length != NFS4_MAX_UINT64) &&
>> LOFF_OVERFLOW(offset, length)));
>> }
>>
>> @@ -2724,11 +2744,7 @@ nfsd4_lock(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct
>> nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
>> file_lock.fl_lmops = &nfsd_posix_mng_ops;
>>
>> file_lock.fl_start = lock->lk_offset;
>> - if ((lock->lk_length == ~(u64)0) ||
>> - LOFF_OVERFLOW(lock->lk_offset, lock->lk_length))
>> - file_lock.fl_end = ~(u64)0;
>> - else
>> - file_lock.fl_end = lock->lk_offset + lock->lk_length - 1;
>> + file_lock.fl_end = last_byte_offset(lock->lk_offset, lock-
>>> lk_length);
>
> Likewise, I think for proper interoperation with our VFS locking code,
> last_byte_offset should return a loff_t, and use OFFSET_MAX, not
> NFS4_MAX_UINT64 for the "biggest value I can think of" return.
I actually reuse last_byte_offset in the pnfs code for layout
ranges too so I prefer to leave it in nfs4 "units" and maybe
add a wrapper function that does the conversion, possibly with
range checking, and returning status indicating whether
information was lost or not.
>
> This is a common issue for NFS -- the NFS/NLM wire data types for lock
> range values are u32 and u64, but Linux's internal types are
> loff_t's. Our XDR code should manage this conversion and check that
> the incoming lock ranges can be supported by the implementation.
I'm not sure if the XDR layer is the right place for that.
Personally I think this should be checked at a higher layer
but I don't feel strongly about it.
>
> We don't actually have any unit test cases that check the behavior of
> this code around the file size and lock range maxima.
Fred, how hard would it be to add these cases to the pynfs
test suite?
Benny
>
>> nfs4_transform_lock_offset(&file_lock);
>>
>> /*
>> @@ -2827,10 +2843,7 @@ nfsd4_lockt(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct
>> nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
>> file_lock.fl_lmops = &nfsd_posix_mng_ops;
>>
>> file_lock.fl_start = lockt->lt_offset;
>> - if ((lockt->lt_length == ~(u64)0) || LOFF_OVERFLOW(lockt-
>>> lt_offset, lockt->lt_length))
>> - file_lock.fl_end = ~(u64)0;
>> - else
>> - file_lock.fl_end = lockt->lt_offset + lockt->lt_length - 1;
>> + file_lock.fl_end = last_byte_offset(lockt->lt_offset, lockt-
>>> lt_length);
>> nfs4_transform_lock_offset(&file_lock);
>>
>> @@ -2894,10 +2907,7 @@ nfsd4_locku(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct
>> nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
>> file_lock.fl_lmops = &nfsd_posix_mng_ops;
>> file_lock.fl_start = locku->lu_offset;
>>
>> - if ((locku->lu_length == ~(u64)0) || LOFF_OVERFLOW(locku-
>>> lu_offset, locku->lu_length))
>> - file_lock.fl_end = ~(u64)0;
>> - else
>> - file_lock.fl_end = locku->lu_offset + locku->lu_length - 1;
>> + file_lock.fl_end = last_byte_offset(locku->lu_offset, locku-
>>> lu_length);
>> nfs4_transform_lock_offset(&file_lock);
>>
>> /*
>> diff --git a/include/linux/nfs4.h b/include/linux/nfs4.h
>> index ea03667..b912311 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/nfs4.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/nfs4.h
>> @@ -88,6 +88,8 @@
>> #define NFS4_ACE_GENERIC_EXECUTE 0x001200A0
>> #define NFS4_ACE_MASK_ALL 0x001F01FF
>>
>> +#define NFS4_MAX_UINT64 (~(u64)0)
>> +
>> enum nfs4_acl_whotype {
>> NFS4_ACL_WHO_NAMED = 0,
>> NFS4_ACL_WHO_OWNER,
>
> --
> Chuck Lever
> chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com
On Dec 17, 2008, at Dec 17, 2008, 5:09 AM, Benny Halevy wrote:
> Chuck Lever wrote:
>> Hi Benny-
>>
>> On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:42 PM, Benny Halevy wrote:
>>> refactor the nfs4 server lock code to use last_byte_offset
>>> to compute the last byte covered by the lock. Check for overflow
>>> so that the last byte is set to NFS4_MAX_UINT64 if offset + len
>>> wraps around.
>>>
>>> Also, use NFS4_MAX_UINT64 for ~(u64)0 where appropriate.
>>
>> Comments below are more about the existing code than your patch.
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Benny Halevy <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> +----------------
>>> include/linux/nfs4.h | 2 ++
>>> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
>>> index 977ef84..1835538 100644
>>> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
>>> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
>>> @@ -2404,6 +2404,26 @@ out:
>>> #define LOCK_HASH_SIZE (1 << LOCK_HASH_BITS)
>>> #define LOCK_HASH_MASK (LOCK_HASH_SIZE - 1)
>>>
>>> +static inline u64
>>> +end_offset(u64 start, u64 len)
>>> +{
>>> + u64 end;
>>> +
>>> + end = start + len;
>>> + return end >= start ? end: NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +/* last octet in a range */
>>> +static inline u64
>>> +last_byte_offset(u64 start, u64 len)
>>> +{
>>> + u64 end;
>>> +
>>> + BUG_ON(!len);
>>> + end = start + len;
>>> + return end > start ? end - 1: NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> #define lockownerid_hashval(id) \
>>> ((id) & LOCK_HASH_MASK)
>>>
>>> @@ -2506,8 +2526,8 @@ nfs4_set_lock_denied(struct file_lock *fl,
>>> struct nfsd4_lock_denied *deny)
>>> deny->ld_clientid.cl_id = 0;
>>> }
>>> deny->ld_start = fl->fl_start;
>>> - deny->ld_length = ~(u64)0;
>>> - if (fl->fl_end != ~(u64)0)
>>> + deny->ld_length = NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
>>> + if (fl->fl_end != NFS4_MAX_UINT64)
>>
>> Someone more expert with the locking code than I am should comment on
>> this... but fl_end is a loff_t (long long) -- not a u64. The check
>> here should be for OFFSET_MAX, just like it is in lockd, right? Is
>
> Yes. I think you're right.
> nfsd4_lock calls nfs4_transform_lock_offset right after
> setting fl_end = last_byte_offset()
> and nfs4_transform_lock_offset "truncates" the lock to
> OFFSET_MAX.
>
> That said, I wonder if we shouldn't return NFS4ERR_BAD_RANGE
> in nfsd4_lock lock->lk_length != NFS4_MAX_UINT64 &&
> last_byte_offset(lock->lk_offset, lock->lk_length) > (u64)OFFSET_MAX.
> (or just != file_lock.fl_end after nfs4_transform_lock_offset)
I had assumed that lock byte ranges were a pair of file byte offsets.
Maybe that's not accurate. Overall it would be less confusing if we
had clear type labeling (or some other documentation) so that as this
logic operates, we can see exactly what is being operated on: local
file offset, NFS lock byte range, NFS file offset, layout offset, and
so on. But perhaps there isn't much of a distinction to be made.
> The problem is that rfc3530 seems to refer only to 32-bit wide lock
> ranges and not to signed offsets.
>
> Some servers may only support locking for byte offsets that fit
> within 32 bits. If the client specifies a range that includes a
> byte
> beyond the last byte offset of the 32-bit range, but does not
> include
> the last byte offset of the 32-bit and all of the byte offsets
> beyond
> it, up to the end of the valid 64-bit range, such a 32-bit server
> MUST return the error NFS4ERR_BAD_RANGE.
>
>> "long long" the same width on all hardware architectures?
>
> I think so. But even if it is, I don't know if that's just
> by chance or by design...
>
>>
>>> deny->ld_length = fl->fl_end - fl->fl_start + 1;
>>> deny->ld_type = NFS4_READ_LT;
>>> if (fl->fl_type != F_RDLCK)
>>> @@ -2604,7 +2624,7 @@ out:
>>> static int
>>> check_lock_length(u64 offset, u64 length)
>>> {
>>> - return ((length == 0) || ((length != ~(u64)0) &&
>>> + return ((length == 0) || ((length != NFS4_MAX_UINT64) &&
>>> LOFF_OVERFLOW(offset, length)));
>>> }
>>>
>>> @@ -2724,11 +2744,7 @@ nfsd4_lock(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct
>>> nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
>>> file_lock.fl_lmops = &nfsd_posix_mng_ops;
>>>
>>> file_lock.fl_start = lock->lk_offset;
>>> - if ((lock->lk_length == ~(u64)0) ||
>>> - LOFF_OVERFLOW(lock->lk_offset, lock->lk_length))
>>> - file_lock.fl_end = ~(u64)0;
>>> - else
>>> - file_lock.fl_end = lock->lk_offset + lock->lk_length - 1;
>>> + file_lock.fl_end = last_byte_offset(lock->lk_offset, lock-
>>>> lk_length);
>>
>> Likewise, I think for proper interoperation with our VFS locking
>> code,
>> last_byte_offset should return a loff_t, and use OFFSET_MAX, not
>> NFS4_MAX_UINT64 for the "biggest value I can think of" return.
>
> I actually reuse last_byte_offset in the pnfs code for layout
> ranges too so I prefer to leave it in nfs4 "units" and maybe
> add a wrapper function that does the conversion, possibly with
> range checking, and returning status indicating whether
> information was lost or not.
It goes without saying that such a shared helper ought to have a more
specific name, like nfs_last_byte_offset(), if it should appear in the
kernel's global name space.
But I think we have a similar problem here: are lock byte ranges the
same as layout ranges the same as generic file offsets?
>> This is a common issue for NFS -- the NFS/NLM wire data types for
>> lock
>> range values are u32 and u64, but Linux's internal types are
>> loff_t's. Our XDR code should manage this conversion and check that
>> the incoming lock ranges can be supported by the implementation.
>
> I'm not sure if the XDR layer is the right place for that.
> Personally I think this should be checked at a higher layer
> but I don't feel strongly about it.
In that case, maybe we should consider creating some shared helpers
that manage this conversion for all three NFS versions. I would think
that handling this in the XDR layer means we have separate conversion
logic for the three NFS versions, which handle these lock ranges
differently. But they all have the same issue, which is that the wire
data type is not the same as loff_t.
I think of XDR as the place to handle type conversion and range
checking. Perhaps opaques like NFS file handles or client IDs might
be best handled in upper layers, but I'm not sure about simpler types
like u32 and file offsets and the like. In this case, the logic for
handling range checking is perhaps too specific to be done in the XDR
layer?
>> We don't actually have any unit test cases that check the behavior of
>> this code around the file size and lock range maxima.
>
> Fred, how hard would it be to add these cases to the pynfs
> test suite?
>
> Benny
>
>>
>>> nfs4_transform_lock_offset(&file_lock);
>>>
>>> /*
>>> @@ -2827,10 +2843,7 @@ nfsd4_lockt(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct
>>> nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
>>> file_lock.fl_lmops = &nfsd_posix_mng_ops;
>>>
>>> file_lock.fl_start = lockt->lt_offset;
>>> - if ((lockt->lt_length == ~(u64)0) || LOFF_OVERFLOW(lockt-
>>>> lt_offset, lockt->lt_length))
>>> - file_lock.fl_end = ~(u64)0;
>>> - else
>>> - file_lock.fl_end = lockt->lt_offset + lockt->lt_length - 1;
>>> + file_lock.fl_end = last_byte_offset(lockt->lt_offset, lockt-
>>>> lt_length);
>>> nfs4_transform_lock_offset(&file_lock);
>>>
>>> @@ -2894,10 +2907,7 @@ nfsd4_locku(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct
>>> nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
>>> file_lock.fl_lmops = &nfsd_posix_mng_ops;
>>> file_lock.fl_start = locku->lu_offset;
>>>
>>> - if ((locku->lu_length == ~(u64)0) || LOFF_OVERFLOW(locku-
>>>> lu_offset, locku->lu_length))
>>> - file_lock.fl_end = ~(u64)0;
>>> - else
>>> - file_lock.fl_end = locku->lu_offset + locku->lu_length - 1;
>>> + file_lock.fl_end = last_byte_offset(locku->lu_offset, locku-
>>>> lu_length);
>>> nfs4_transform_lock_offset(&file_lock);
>>>
>>> /*
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/nfs4.h b/include/linux/nfs4.h
>>> index ea03667..b912311 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/nfs4.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/nfs4.h
>>> @@ -88,6 +88,8 @@
>>> #define NFS4_ACE_GENERIC_EXECUTE 0x001200A0
>>> #define NFS4_ACE_MASK_ALL 0x001F01FF
>>>
>>> +#define NFS4_MAX_UINT64 (~(u64)0)
>>> +
>>> enum nfs4_acl_whotype {
>>> NFS4_ACL_WHO_NAMED = 0,
>>> NFS4_ACL_WHO_OWNER,
--
Chuck Lever
chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008, Benny Halevy wrote:
> Chuck Lever wrote:
>> Hi Benny-
>>
>> On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:42 PM, Benny Halevy wrote:
>>> refactor the nfs4 server lock code to use last_byte_offset
>>> to compute the last byte covered by the lock. Check for overflow
>>> so that the last byte is set to NFS4_MAX_UINT64 if offset + len
>>> wraps around.
>>>
>>> Also, use NFS4_MAX_UINT64 for ~(u64)0 where appropriate.
>>
>> Comments below are more about the existing code than your patch.
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Benny Halevy <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>>> include/linux/nfs4.h | 2 ++
>>> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
>>> index 977ef84..1835538 100644
>>> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
>>> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
>>> @@ -2404,6 +2404,26 @@ out:
>>> #define LOCK_HASH_SIZE (1 << LOCK_HASH_BITS)
>>> #define LOCK_HASH_MASK (LOCK_HASH_SIZE - 1)
>>>
>>> +static inline u64
>>> +end_offset(u64 start, u64 len)
>>> +{
>>> + u64 end;
>>> +
>>> + end = start + len;
>>> + return end >= start ? end: NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +/* last octet in a range */
>>> +static inline u64
>>> +last_byte_offset(u64 start, u64 len)
>>> +{
>>> + u64 end;
>>> +
>>> + BUG_ON(!len);
>>> + end = start + len;
>>> + return end > start ? end - 1: NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> #define lockownerid_hashval(id) \
>>> ((id) & LOCK_HASH_MASK)
>>>
>>> @@ -2506,8 +2526,8 @@ nfs4_set_lock_denied(struct file_lock *fl,
>>> struct nfsd4_lock_denied *deny)
>>> deny->ld_clientid.cl_id = 0;
>>> }
>>> deny->ld_start = fl->fl_start;
>>> - deny->ld_length = ~(u64)0;
>>> - if (fl->fl_end != ~(u64)0)
>>> + deny->ld_length = NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
>>> + if (fl->fl_end != NFS4_MAX_UINT64)
>>
>> Someone more expert with the locking code than I am should comment on
>> this... but fl_end is a loff_t (long long) -- not a u64. The check
>> here should be for OFFSET_MAX, just like it is in lockd, right? Is
>
> Yes. I think you're right.
> nfsd4_lock calls nfs4_transform_lock_offset right after
> setting fl_end = last_byte_offset()
> and nfs4_transform_lock_offset "truncates" the lock to
> OFFSET_MAX.
>
> That said, I wonder if we shouldn't return NFS4ERR_BAD_RANGE
> in nfsd4_lock lock->lk_length != NFS4_MAX_UINT64 &&
> last_byte_offset(lock->lk_offset, lock->lk_length) > (u64)OFFSET_MAX.
> (or just != file_lock.fl_end after nfs4_transform_lock_offset)
>
> The problem is that rfc3530 seems to refer only to 32-bit wide lock
> ranges and not to signed offsets.
>
> Some servers may only support locking for byte offsets that fit
> within 32 bits. If the client specifies a range that includes a byte
> beyond the last byte offset of the 32-bit range, but does not include
> the last byte offset of the 32-bit and all of the byte offsets beyond
> it, up to the end of the valid 64-bit range, such a 32-bit server
> MUST return the error NFS4ERR_BAD_RANGE.
>
>> "long long" the same width on all hardware architectures?
>
> I think so. But even if it is, I don't know if that's just
> by chance or by design...
>
>>
>>> deny->ld_length = fl->fl_end - fl->fl_start + 1;
>>> deny->ld_type = NFS4_READ_LT;
>>> if (fl->fl_type != F_RDLCK)
>>> @@ -2604,7 +2624,7 @@ out:
>>> static int
>>> check_lock_length(u64 offset, u64 length)
>>> {
>>> - return ((length == 0) || ((length != ~(u64)0) &&
>>> + return ((length == 0) || ((length != NFS4_MAX_UINT64) &&
>>> LOFF_OVERFLOW(offset, length)));
>>> }
>>>
>>> @@ -2724,11 +2744,7 @@ nfsd4_lock(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct
>>> nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
>>> file_lock.fl_lmops = &nfsd_posix_mng_ops;
>>>
>>> file_lock.fl_start = lock->lk_offset;
>>> - if ((lock->lk_length == ~(u64)0) ||
>>> - LOFF_OVERFLOW(lock->lk_offset, lock->lk_length))
>>> - file_lock.fl_end = ~(u64)0;
>>> - else
>>> - file_lock.fl_end = lock->lk_offset + lock->lk_length - 1;
>>> + file_lock.fl_end = last_byte_offset(lock->lk_offset, lock-
>>>> lk_length);
>>
>> Likewise, I think for proper interoperation with our VFS locking code,
>> last_byte_offset should return a loff_t, and use OFFSET_MAX, not
>> NFS4_MAX_UINT64 for the "biggest value I can think of" return.
>
> I actually reuse last_byte_offset in the pnfs code for layout
> ranges too so I prefer to leave it in nfs4 "units" and maybe
> add a wrapper function that does the conversion, possibly with
> range checking, and returning status indicating whether
> information was lost or not.
>
>>
>> This is a common issue for NFS -- the NFS/NLM wire data types for lock
>> range values are u32 and u64, but Linux's internal types are
>> loff_t's. Our XDR code should manage this conversion and check that
>> the incoming lock ranges can be supported by the implementation.
>
> I'm not sure if the XDR layer is the right place for that.
> Personally I think this should be checked at a higher layer
> but I don't feel strongly about it.
>
>>
>> We don't actually have any unit test cases that check the behavior of
>> this code around the file size and lock range maxima.
>
> Fred, how hard would it be to add these cases to the pynfs
> test suite?
>
> Benny
>
The 4.0 suite has a few tests along these lines such as LOCK6 and LOCKRNG.
Fred
>>
>>> nfs4_transform_lock_offset(&file_lock);
>>>
>>> /*
>>> @@ -2827,10 +2843,7 @@ nfsd4_lockt(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct
>>> nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
>>> file_lock.fl_lmops = &nfsd_posix_mng_ops;
>>>
>>> file_lock.fl_start = lockt->lt_offset;
>>> - if ((lockt->lt_length == ~(u64)0) || LOFF_OVERFLOW(lockt-
>>>> lt_offset, lockt->lt_length))
>>> - file_lock.fl_end = ~(u64)0;
>>> - else
>>> - file_lock.fl_end = lockt->lt_offset + lockt->lt_length - 1;
>>> + file_lock.fl_end = last_byte_offset(lockt->lt_offset, lockt-
>>>> lt_length);
>>> nfs4_transform_lock_offset(&file_lock);
>>>
>>> @@ -2894,10 +2907,7 @@ nfsd4_locku(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct
>>> nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
>>> file_lock.fl_lmops = &nfsd_posix_mng_ops;
>>> file_lock.fl_start = locku->lu_offset;
>>>
>>> - if ((locku->lu_length == ~(u64)0) || LOFF_OVERFLOW(locku-
>>>> lu_offset, locku->lu_length))
>>> - file_lock.fl_end = ~(u64)0;
>>> - else
>>> - file_lock.fl_end = locku->lu_offset + locku->lu_length - 1;
>>> + file_lock.fl_end = last_byte_offset(locku->lu_offset, locku-
>>>> lu_length);
>>> nfs4_transform_lock_offset(&file_lock);
>>>
>>> /*
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/nfs4.h b/include/linux/nfs4.h
>>> index ea03667..b912311 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/nfs4.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/nfs4.h
>>> @@ -88,6 +88,8 @@
>>> #define NFS4_ACE_GENERIC_EXECUTE 0x001200A0
>>> #define NFS4_ACE_MASK_ALL 0x001F01FF
>>>
>>> +#define NFS4_MAX_UINT64 (~(u64)0)
>>> +
>>> enum nfs4_acl_whotype {
>>> NFS4_ACL_WHO_NAMED = 0,
>>> NFS4_ACL_WHO_OWNER,
>>
>> --
>> Chuck Lever
>> chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com
>
>
>
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 07:38:09PM +0200, Benny Halevy wrote:
> Bruce, following are half a dozen patches
> from the nfs41/pnfs tree
> git://linux-nfs.org/~bhalevy/linux-pnfs.git nfsd-for-2.6.29
Thanks, applied.--b.
>
> [PATCH 1/6] nfsd: add etoosmall to nfserrno
> [PATCH 2/6] nfsd: dprint each op status in nfsd4_proc_compound
> [PATCH 3/6] nfsd: git rid of nfs4_cb_null_ops declaration
> [PATCH 4/6] nfsd: delete wrong file comment from nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
> [PATCH 5/6] nfsd: last_byte_offset
> [PATCH 6/6] nfsd: get rid of NFSD_VERSION
>
> Benny