On 12/16/2013 05:43 PM, Peng Tao wrote: > Hi Benny, > > On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 11:51 PM, Benny Halevy <bhalevy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Otherwise the lockowner may by added to "matches" more than once. >> >> Signed-off-by: Benny Halevy <bhalevy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 17 +++++++++++------ >> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c >> index 0874998..b04f765 100644 >> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c >> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c >> @@ -4192,6 +4192,7 @@ alloc_init_lock_stateowner(unsigned int strhashval, struct nfs4_client *clp, str >> /* It is the openowner seqid that will be incremented in encode in the >> * case of new lockowners; so increment the lock seqid manually: */ >> lo->lo_owner.so_seqid = lock->lk_new_lock_seqid + 1; >> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&lo->lo_list); >> hash_lockowner(lo, strhashval, clp, open_stp); >> return lo; >> } >> @@ -4646,7 +4647,6 @@ nfsd4_release_lockowner(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, >> if (status) >> goto out; >> >> - status = nfserr_locks_held; >> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&matches); >> >> list_for_each_entry(sop, &nn->ownerstr_hashtbl[hashval], so_strhash) { >> @@ -4654,25 +4654,30 @@ nfsd4_release_lockowner(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, >> continue; >> if (!same_owner_str(sop, owner, clid)) >> continue; >> + lo = lockowner(sop); >> list_for_each_entry(stp, &sop->so_stateids, >> st_perstateowner) { >> - lo = lockowner(sop); >> - if (check_for_locks(stp->st_file, lo)) >> - goto out; >> + if (check_for_locks(stp->st_file, lo)) { >> + status = nfserr_locks_held; >> + goto locks_held; >> + } >> list_add(&lo->lo_list, &matches); >> + break; > If so_stateids is empty, lockowner is skipped. It was skipped before > the patch as well but I guess that need to be fixed, right? I'm not sure that's a valid state at all. Benny > > Thanks, > Tao > -- 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