Re: [PATCH v7 13/19] NFSD return nfs4_stid in nfs4_preprocess_stateid_op

["J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 12:52:37PM -0400, Olga Kornievskaia wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:34 PM J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 12:12:17PM -0400, Olga Kornievskaia wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 11:52 AM J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 05:13:47PM -0400, Olga Kornievskaia wrote:
> > > > > @@ -1026,7 +1026,8 @@ static __be32 nfsd4_do_lookupp(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct svc_fh *fh)
> > > > >  static __be32
> > > > >  nfsd4_verify_copy(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
> > > > >                 stateid_t *src_stateid, struct nfsd_file **src,
> > > > > -               stateid_t *dst_stateid, struct nfsd_file **dst)
> > > > > +               stateid_t *dst_stateid, struct nfsd_file **dst,
> > > > > +               struct nfs4_stid **stid)
> > > > >  {
> > > > >       __be32 status;
> > > > >
> > > > ...
> > > > > @@ -1072,7 +1073,7 @@ static __be32 nfsd4_do_lookupp(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct svc_fh *fh)
> > > > >       __be32 status;
> > > > >
> > > > >       status = nfsd4_verify_copy(rqstp, cstate, &clone->cl_src_stateid, &src,
> > > > > -                                &clone->cl_dst_stateid, &dst);
> > > > > +                                &clone->cl_dst_stateid, &dst, NULL);
> > > > >       if (status)
> > > > >               goto out;
> > > > >
> > > > > @@ -1260,7 +1261,7 @@ static int nfsd4_do_async_copy(void *data)
> > > > >
> > > > >       status = nfsd4_verify_copy(rqstp, cstate, &copy->cp_src_stateid,
> > > > >                                  &copy->nf_src, &copy->cp_dst_stateid,
> > > > > -                                &copy->nf_dst);
> > > > > +                                &copy->nf_dst, NULL);
> > > > >       if (status)
> > > > >               goto out;
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > So both callers pass NULL for the new stid parameter.  Looks like that's
> > > > still true after the full series of patches, too.
> > > >
> > >
> > > If you look at an earlier chunk it uses it (there is only a single
> > > user of it: copy notify state)
> >
> > You're talking about nfs4_preprocess_stateid_op, the above is
> > nfsd4_verify_copy.
> 
> I see. You are right, looks like after reworks the nfsd4_verify_copy
> doesn't need a stid. Previously both copy stateid and copy_notify
> stateids were tied to its parents but I've removed the link for the
> copy stateid a while back. Should I now combine this patch with "NFSD
> add COPY_NOTIFY operation" because that's the only caller of
> nfsd4_preprocess_stateid_op that needs the stid.

Yeah, maybe so.

--b.