From: Boaz Harrosh Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfsd41: Fix a crash when a callback is retried Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 20:38:36 +0300 Message-ID: <4C28DE1C.3030907@panasas.com> References: <4C28DCE0.7050201@panasas.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 To: "J. Bruce Fields" , Benny Halevy , "Labiaga, Ricardo" , NFS list Return-path: Received: from daytona.panasas.com ([67.152.220.89]:51932 "EHLO daytona.int.panasas.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751495Ab0F1Rij (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jun 2010 13:38:39 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4C28DCE0.7050201@panasas.com> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 06/28/2010 08:33 PM, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > > If a callback is retried at nfsd4_cb_recall_done() do to > some error. The returned rpc reply would then crash here: > > @@ -514,6 +514,7 @@ decode_cb_sequence(struct xdr_stream *xdr, struct nfsd4_cb_sequence *res, > u32 dummy; > __be32 *p; > > + BUG_ON(!res); > if (res->cbs_minorversion == 0) > return 0; > > [BUG_ON added for demonstration] > > This is because the nfsd4_cb_done_sequence() has NULLed out > the task->tk_msg.rpc_resp pointer. > > This problem was introduced by a 4.1 protocol addition patch: > [0421b5c5] nfsd41: Backchannel: Implement cb_recall over NFSv4.1 > > Which was overlooking the possibility of an RPC callback retries. > > Signed-off-by: Boaz Harrosh Bruce do we need a CC: stable@kernel.org here. Is any code actually exercising callbacks? And with 4.1? It is an existing bug but an highly theoretical one. I'd say: innocent until proven guilty in this case. Boaz > --- > 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 f3b5015..dace7e2 100644 > --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c > +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c > @@ -869,9 +869,6 @@ static void nfsd4_cb_done_sequence(struct rpc_task *task, > rpc_wake_up_next(&clp->cl_cb_waitq); > dprintk("%s: freed slot, new seqid=%d\n", __func__, > clp->cl_cb_seq_nr); > - > - /* We're done looking into the sequence information */ > - task->tk_msg.rpc_resp = NULL; > } > } >