On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:36:52 -0400 Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The first patch addresses the Oops. > The second will hopefully address the looping. > > Trond Myklebust (2): > NFSv4: Ensure that the LOCK code sets exception->inode > NFSv4: Ensure that we check lock exclusive/shared type against open > modes > > fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++-- > 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > ACK. Looks like the best way to handle this... I wonder though whether we should also push 14977489 to stable as well. While we expect NFS4ERR_OPENMODE from these codepaths, it's possible that we could get that in others when we don't expect it (from a misbehaving server perhaps?). That could cause an oops since we're not checking for a NULL inode in nfs4_handle_exception currently in 3.3.x kernels. -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> -- 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
