Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mail-pa0-f47.google.com ([209.85.220.47]:33428 "EHLO mail-pa0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754322AbaHNOEi (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Aug 2014 10:04:38 -0400 Message-ID: <53ECC1E4.6080104@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 22:04:20 +0800 From: Kinglong Mee MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeff Layton CC: "J. Bruce Fields" , Linux NFS Mailing List , Trond Myklebust , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Joe Perches Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3 v2] fs/locks.c: Copy all information for conflock References: <53BAAAC5.9000106@gmail.com> <53E22EA5.70708@gmail.com> <20140809065112.700e0ecc@tlielax.poochiereds.net> <53E791F1.40802@gmail.com> <20140811121949.4c3d7894@tlielax.poochiereds.net> <53ECAADB.6040903@gmail.com> <20140814100025.2b2f72db@tlielax.poochiereds.net> In-Reply-To: <20140814100025.2b2f72db@tlielax.poochiereds.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 8/14/2014 22:00, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Thu, 14 Aug 2014 20:26:03 +0800 > Kinglong Mee wrote: > >> On 8/12/2014 00:19, Jeff Layton wrote: >>> On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 23:38:25 +0800 >>> Kinglong Mee wrote: >>> >>>> Commit d5b9026a67 ([PATCH] knfsd: locks: flag NFSv4-owned locks) using >>>> fl_lmops field in file_lock for checking nfsd4 lockowner. >>>> >>>> But, commit 1a747ee0cc (locks: don't call ->copy_lock methods on return >>>> of conflicting locks) causes the fl_lmops of conflock always be NULL. >>>> >>>> Also, commit 0996905f93 (lockd: posix_test_lock() should not call >>>> locks_copy_lock()) caused the fl_lmops of conflock always be NULL too. >>>> >>>> v2: Only change the order from 3/3 to 1/3 now. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Kinglong Mee >>>> --- >>>> fs/lockd/svclock.c | 2 +- >>>> fs/locks.c | 25 ++++++------------------- >>>> include/linux/fs.h | 6 ------ >>>> 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/fs/lockd/svclock.c b/fs/lockd/svclock.c >>>> index ab798a8..e1f209c 100644 >>>> --- a/fs/lockd/svclock.c >>>> +++ b/fs/lockd/svclock.c >>>> @@ -677,7 +677,7 @@ nlmsvc_update_deferred_block(struct nlm_block *block, struct file_lock *conf, >>>> block->b_flags |= B_TIMED_OUT; >>>> if (conf) { >>>> if (block->b_fl) >>>> - __locks_copy_lock(block->b_fl, conf); >>>> + locks_copy_lock(block->b_fl, conf); >>>> } >>>> } >>>> >>>> diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c >>>> index 717fbc4..91b0f03 100644 >>>> --- a/fs/locks.c >>>> +++ b/fs/locks.c >>>> @@ -266,35 +266,22 @@ static void locks_copy_private(struct file_lock *new, struct file_lock *fl) >>>> new->fl_lmops = fl->fl_lmops; >>>> } >>>> >>>> -/* >>>> - * Initialize a new lock from an existing file_lock structure. >>>> - */ >>>> -void __locks_copy_lock(struct file_lock *new, const struct file_lock *fl) >>>> +void locks_copy_lock(struct file_lock *new, struct file_lock *fl) >>>> { >>>> + locks_release_private(new); >>>> + >>>> new->fl_owner = fl->fl_owner; >>>> new->fl_pid = fl->fl_pid; >>>> - new->fl_file = NULL; >>>> + new->fl_file = fl->fl_file; >>>> new->fl_flags = fl->fl_flags; >>>> new->fl_type = fl->fl_type; >>>> new->fl_start = fl->fl_start; >>>> new->fl_end = fl->fl_end; >>>> new->fl_ops = NULL; >>>> new->fl_lmops = NULL; >>>> -} >>>> -EXPORT_SYMBOL(__locks_copy_lock); >>>> - >>>> -void locks_copy_lock(struct file_lock *new, struct file_lock *fl) >>>> -{ >>>> - locks_release_private(new); >>>> - >>>> - __locks_copy_lock(new, fl); >>>> - new->fl_file = fl->fl_file; >>>> - new->fl_ops = fl->fl_ops; >>>> - new->fl_lmops = fl->fl_lmops; >>>> >>>> locks_copy_private(new, fl); >>>> } >>> >>> (cc'ing Joe Perches) >>> >>> Ok, so you're basically just reverting 1a747ee0cc11a19. The catch there >>> is that you now need to ensure that any conflock structures are >>> properly initialized before passing them to locks_copy_lock. >>> >>> The nfsv4 server code currently doesn't do that and it will need to be >>> fixed to do so or that will be a regression. >> >> I don't think so. >> locks_alloc_lock() has initialize the file_lock struct, >> the same as locks_init_lock(). >> >> I will clean the duplicate initialize for file_lock in nfs4state.c in v3. >> > > Ahh, you're correct. Yes, please just remove that instead. You might > also want to look for other places in the kernel that call > locks_init_lock unnecessarily. We might as well get rid of all of > them while we're looking. OK, I will review those codes where calling locks_init_lock(). > >>> For the NLM code, Joe Perches has proposed a patch to remove the >>> conflock parameter from lm_grant since the callers always pass in NULL >>> anyway. You may want to pull in his patch and rebase yours on top of it >>> since it'll remove that __locks_copy_lock call altogether. >>> >>> Joe, is Andrew merging that patch or do I need to pull it into the >>> locks tree? >> >> I will update this patch based on that patch and your new patch for locks.c. >> >> thanks, >> Kinglong Mee >> > > Thanks. I wiggled Joe's patch on top of my current set of locking > patches and will plan to merge it for v3.18 unless there are any > objections. I saw your patch, thank you very much. thanks, Kinglong Mee > >>> >>>> - >>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(locks_copy_lock); >>>> >>>> static inline int flock_translate_cmd(int cmd) { >>>> @@ -718,7 +705,7 @@ posix_test_lock(struct file *filp, struct file_lock *fl) >>>> break; >>>> } >>>> if (cfl) { >>>> - __locks_copy_lock(fl, cfl); >>>> + locks_copy_lock(fl, cfl); >>>> if (cfl->fl_nspid) >>>> fl->fl_pid = pid_vnr(cfl->fl_nspid); >>>> } else >>>> @@ -921,7 +908,7 @@ static int __posix_lock_file(struct inode *inode, struct file_lock *request, str >>>> if (!posix_locks_conflict(request, fl)) >>>> continue; >>>> if (conflock) >>>> - __locks_copy_lock(conflock, fl); >>>> + locks_copy_lock(conflock, fl); >>>> error = -EAGAIN; >>>> if (!(request->fl_flags & FL_SLEEP)) >>>> goto out; >>>> diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h >>>> index e11d60c..ced023d 100644 >>>> --- a/include/linux/fs.h >>>> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h >>>> @@ -941,7 +941,6 @@ void locks_free_lock(struct file_lock *fl); >>>> extern void locks_init_lock(struct file_lock *); >>>> extern struct file_lock * locks_alloc_lock(void); >>>> extern void locks_copy_lock(struct file_lock *, struct file_lock *); >>>> -extern void __locks_copy_lock(struct file_lock *, const struct file_lock *); >>>> extern void locks_remove_posix(struct file *, fl_owner_t); >>>> extern void locks_remove_file(struct file *); >>>> extern void locks_release_private(struct file_lock *); >>>> @@ -1001,11 +1000,6 @@ static inline void locks_init_lock(struct file_lock *fl) >>>> return; >>>> } >>>> >>>> -static inline void __locks_copy_lock(struct file_lock *new, struct file_lock *fl) >>>> -{ >>>> - return; >>>> -} >>>> - >>>> static inline void locks_copy_lock(struct file_lock *new, struct file_lock *fl) >>>> { >>>> return; >>> >>> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > >