On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 04:19:20AM +0300, Benny Halevy wrote:
> From: Andy Adamson <andros@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> For separation of session slot and clientid slot processing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Adamson <andros@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Benny Halevy <bhalevy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
This was actually already upstream, just not in my for-2.6.31, because I
based my for-2.6.31 branch off of 2.6.30-rc3, and submitted this to
2.6.30 after -rc3. So my choices included:
- Rebase for-2.6.31 onto a later -rc: but things will go
smoother if I stop rebasing and rewriting my for-xxx branches,
and I've stopped doing that this time around.
- Apply an identical patch to for-2.6.31 at the same time I
submit it upstream: then after I submit for-2.6.31, the
history would end up with two commits each for the same patch.
I don't think that's a serious problem, but it seems ugly.
- Merge upstream back into my for-2.6.31 after submitting
patches: Linus has complained before about people doing this
too much, but I'm assuming doing it in a case like this where
there's a clear reason is OK.
I think option 3 was the right one; so I've done that now and merged
2.6.30 back into for-2.6.31....
Better might have been to merge a for-2.6.30 branch into for-2.6.31.
--b.
> ---
> fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 24 +++++++++++++-----------
> 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> index d5caf2a..c22ec9b 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> @@ -1313,26 +1313,26 @@ error:
> }
>
> static int
> -check_slot_seqid(u32 seqid, struct nfsd4_slot *slot)
> +check_slot_seqid(u32 seqid, u32 slot_seqid, int slot_inuse)
> {
> - dprintk("%s enter. seqid %d slot->sl_seqid %d\n", __func__, seqid,
> - slot->sl_seqid);
> + dprintk("%s enter. seqid %d slot_seqid %d\n", __func__, seqid,
> + slot_seqid);
>
> /* The slot is in use, and no response has been sent. */
> - if (slot->sl_inuse) {
> - if (seqid == slot->sl_seqid)
> + if (slot_inuse) {
> + if (seqid == slot_seqid)
> return nfserr_jukebox;
> else
> return nfserr_seq_misordered;
> }
> /* Normal */
> - if (likely(seqid == slot->sl_seqid + 1))
> + if (likely(seqid == slot_seqid + 1))
> return nfs_ok;
> /* Replay */
> - if (seqid == slot->sl_seqid)
> + if (seqid == slot_seqid)
> return nfserr_replay_cache;
> /* Wraparound */
> - if (seqid == 1 && (slot->sl_seqid + 1) == 0)
> + if (seqid == 1 && (slot_seqid + 1) == 0)
> return nfs_ok;
> /* Misordered replay or misordered new request */
> return nfserr_seq_misordered;
> @@ -1355,7 +1355,8 @@ nfsd4_create_session(struct svc_rqst *rqstp,
>
> if (conf) {
> slot = &conf->cl_slot;
> - status = check_slot_seqid(cr_ses->seqid, slot);
> + status = check_slot_seqid(cr_ses->seqid, slot->sl_seqid,
> + slot->sl_inuse);
> if (status == nfserr_replay_cache) {
> dprintk("Got a create_session replay! seqid= %d\n",
> slot->sl_seqid);
> @@ -1380,7 +1381,8 @@ nfsd4_create_session(struct svc_rqst *rqstp,
> }
>
> slot = &unconf->cl_slot;
> - status = check_slot_seqid(cr_ses->seqid, slot);
> + status = check_slot_seqid(cr_ses->seqid, slot->sl_seqid,
> + slot->sl_inuse);
> if (status) {
> /* an unconfirmed replay returns misordered */
> status = nfserr_seq_misordered;
> @@ -1481,7 +1483,7 @@ nfsd4_sequence(struct svc_rqst *rqstp,
> slot = &session->se_slots[seq->slotid];
> dprintk("%s: slotid %d\n", __func__, seq->slotid);
>
> - status = check_slot_seqid(seq->seqid, slot);
> + status = check_slot_seqid(seq->seqid, slot->sl_seqid, slot->sl_inuse);
> if (status == nfserr_replay_cache) {
> cstate->slot = slot;
> cstate->session = session;
> --
> 1.6.3
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
