On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 10:18:05AM -0400, Benjamin Coddington wrote: > If nfsd has existing listening sockets without any processes, then an error > returned from svc_create_xprt() for an additional transport will remove > those existing listeners. We're seeing this in practice when userspace > attempts to create rpcrdma transports without having the rpcrdma modules > present before creating nfsd kernel processes. Fix this by checking for > existing sockets before callingn nfsd_destroy(). That seems like an improvement. I'm curious, though, what the rpc.nfsd behavior is on partial failure. And what do we want it to be? If a user runs rpc.nfsd expecting it to start up tcp and rdma, but rdma fails, do we want rpc.nfsd to succeed or fail? Should it exit with nfsd running or not? --b. > > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c | 5 ++++- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c b/fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c > index c2c3d9077dc5..df4613a4924c 100644 > --- a/fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c > +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c > @@ -793,7 +793,10 @@ static ssize_t __write_ports_addxprt(char *buf, struct net *net, const struct cr > svc_xprt_put(xprt); > } > out_err: > - nfsd_destroy(net); > + if (list_empty(&nn->nfsd_serv->sv_permsocks)) > + nfsd_destroy(net); > + else > + nn->nfsd_serv->sv_nrthreads--; > return err; > } > > -- > 2.30.2
