| From | Greg Kroah-Hartman <> | Subject | [PATCH 3.10 072/103] nfsd4: remove lockowner when removing lock stateid | Date | Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:25:35 -0700 |
| |
3.10-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@redhat.com>
commit a1b8ff4c97b4375d21b6d6c45d75877303f61b3b upstream.
The nfsv4 state code has always assumed a one-to-one correspondance between lock stateid's and lockowners even if it appears not to in some places.
We may actually change that, but for now when FREE_STATEID releases a lock stateid it also needs to release the parent lockowner.
Symptoms were a subsequent LOCK crashing in find_lockowner_str when it calls same_lockowner_ino on a lockowner that unexpectedly has an empty so_stateids list.
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
--- fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 11 +++++++++-- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c @@ -3599,9 +3599,16 @@ out: static __be32 nfsd4_free_lock_stateid(struct nfs4_ol_stateid *stp) { - if (check_for_locks(stp->st_file, lockowner(stp->st_stateowner))) + struct nfs4_lockowner *lo = lockowner(stp->st_stateowner); + + if (check_for_locks(stp->st_file, lo)) return nfserr_locks_held; - release_lock_stateid(stp); + /* + * Currently there's a 1-1 lock stateid<->lockowner + * correspondance, and we have to delete the lockowner when we + * delete the lock stateid: + */ + unhash_lockowner(lo); return nfs_ok; }
|