On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 11:39:41PM +0800, Murphy Zhou wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 10:30:01AM +0800, Murphy Zhou wrote:
> > Since commit d0677992d2af ("cifs: add support for flock") added
> > support for flock, LTP/flock03[1] testcase started to fail.
Ping on this one?
> >
> > This testcase is testing flock lock and unlock across fork.
> > The parent locks file and starts the child process, in which
> > it unlock the same fd and lock the same file with another fd
> > again. All the lock and unlock operation should succeed.
> >
> > Now the child process does not actually unlock the file, so
> > the following lock fails. Fix this by allowing flock and OFD
> > lock go through the unlock routine, not skipping if the unlock
> > request comes from another process.
> >
> > Patch has been tested by LTP/xfstests on samba and Windows
> > server, v3.11, with or without cache=none mount option.
>
> Also tested with or without "nolease" mount option. No new
> issue shows.
>
> Thanks!
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/blob/master/testcases/kernel/syscalls/flock/flock03.c
> > Signed-off-by: Murphy Zhou <jencce.kernel@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > fs/cifs/smb2file.c | 7 ++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/cifs/smb2file.c b/fs/cifs/smb2file.c
> > index afe1f03aabe3..eebfbf3a8c80 100644
> > --- a/fs/cifs/smb2file.c
> > +++ b/fs/cifs/smb2file.c
> > @@ -152,7 +152,12 @@ smb2_unlock_range(struct cifsFileInfo *cfile, struct file_lock *flock,
> > (li->offset + li->length))
> > continue;
> > if (current->tgid != li->pid)
> > - continue;
> > + /*
> > + * flock and OFD lock are associated with an open
> > + * file description, not the process.
> > + */
> > + if (!(flock->fl_flags & (FL_FLOCK | FL_OFDLCK)))
> > + continue;
> > if (cinode->can_cache_brlcks) {
> > /*
> > * We can cache brlock requests - simply remove a lock
> > --
> > 2.20.1
> >
> >
>
> --
> Murphy
--
Murphy
