On 2011-12-06 14:40, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 01:26:05PM +0200, Benny Halevy wrote:
>> On 2011-12-06 04:08, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>>> On Sun, Dec 04, 2011 at 02:42:11PM +0200, Benny Halevy wrote:
>>>> On 2011-12-04 14:03, tigran.mkrtchyan@xxxxxxx wrote:
>>>>> From: Tigran Mkrtchyan <tigran.mkrtchyan@xxxxxxx>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Tigran Mkrtchyan <tigran.mkrtchyan@xxxxxxx>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c | 6 ++++++
>>>>> fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++------
>>>>> 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c
>>>>> index fa38336..535aed2 100644
>>>>> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c
>>>>> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c
>>>>> @@ -400,6 +400,12 @@ nfsd4_open(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
>>>>> */
>>>>> status = nfsd4_process_open2(rqstp, &cstate->current_fh, open);
>>>>> WARN_ON(status && open->op_created);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if(status)
>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /* set current state id */
>>>>> + memcpy(&cstate->current_stateid, &open->op_stateid, sizeof(stateid_t));
>>>
>>> That comment is a bit redundant.
>>>
>>>> Since this should be done for all stateid-returning operations
>>>> I think that a cleaner approach could be to mark those as such in
>>>> nfsd4_ops by providing a per-op function to return the operation's
>>>> stateid. You can then call this method from nfsd4_proc_compound()
>>>> after the call to nfsd4_encode_operation() and when status == 0.
>>>
>>> So the choice is between
>>>
>>> + memcpy(&cstate->current_stateid, &open->op_stateid,
>>> sizeof(stateid_t));
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>> + static void get_open_stateid(stateid_t *s)
>>> + {
>>> + memcpy(s, open->op_stateid);
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + [OP_OPEN] = {
>>> + ...
>>> + .op_get_stateid = get_open_stateid,
>>> + ...
>>> + }
>>>
>>> ?
>>>
>>> I'm not so sure.
>>
>> The point is to copy the result stateid into the current_stateid
>> in a centralized place: nfsd4_proc_compound() and do that for all
>> stateid-modifying operations.
>>
>>>
>>> Anyway, thanks Tigran for looking at this.
>>>
>>> Do we want to guarantee that the client can't expire as long as a
>>> compound references the stateid? I think that's the case.
>>
>> The client can't time out while the 4.1 compound is in progress, see commit d768298.
>
> OK, you're right, and presumably it would be a bug for a compound to use
> a session from one client and a stateid from another, so this is taken
> care of. (Except--I think we need to check for that case. On a quick
> skim I don't see the current code doing that.)
>
> Thanks!
>
>> Are you thinking of explicit expiration of the client?
>> We may unhash the client and keep using it while it's referenced
>> so that's not a problem. As far as the stateid goes, we're copying the
>> value of the stateid, not pointing to any stateid structure. If the
>> actual state was destroyed, we will detect that when the current_stateid
>> is used by any successive operation and we cannot find the state using
>> the stateid.
>
> I *think* the concensus of the working group was that explicit
> destruction of a client should wait on in-progress compounds referencing
> any of the client's sessions:
>
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nfsv4/current/msg08584.html
I'm a bit confused, since the rfc5661 says that:
DESTROY_CLIENTID:
If there are
sessions (both idle and non-idle), opens, locks, delegations,
layouts, and/or wants (Section 18.49) associated with the unexpired
lease of the client ID, the server MUST return NFS4ERR_CLIENTID_BUSY.
DESTROY_SESSION:
Locks, delegations, layouts, wants, and the lease, which
are all tied to the client ID, are not affected by DESTROY_SESSION.
>
> So we should probably fix this. But we can fix it at the session level.
>
> So, OK, I can't see any practical objection to doing as Tigran as and
> just passing the value of stateid instead of a reference to some object.
>
> Well, except for performance--it seems unfortunate to have to redo the
> lookup on each use. As long as there's no impact on the existing cases
> (so we're only doing the lookup when a client actually uses the current
> stateid), I can live with that until somebody actually demonstrates some
> harm.
Great. I'm glad we're in agreement!
Benny
>
> --b.
> --
> 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
--
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
