On 3/9/22 7:33 PM, Chuck Lever III wrote:
On Mar 9, 2022, at 10:12 PM, Dai Ngo <dai.ngo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 3/9/22 2:42 PM, Chuck Lever III wrote:
On Mar 4, 2022, at 7:37 PM, Dai Ngo <dai.ngo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Update find_in_sessionid_hashtbl to:
. skip client with CLIENT_EXPIRED flag; discarded courtesy client.
. if courtesy client was found then clear CLIENT_COURTESY and
set CLIENT_RECONNECTED so callers can take appropriate action.
Update nfsd4_sequence and nfsd4_bind_conn_to_session to create client
record for client with CLIENT_RECONNECTED set.
Update nfsd4_destroy_session to discard client with CLIENT_RECONNECTED
set.
Signed-off-by: Dai Ngo <dai.ngo@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
index f42d72a8f5ca..34a59c6f446c 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
@@ -1963,13 +1963,22 @@ find_in_sessionid_hashtbl(struct nfs4_sessionid *sessionid, struct net *net,
{
struct nfsd4_session *session;
__be32 status = nfserr_badsession;
+ struct nfs4_client *clp;
session = __find_in_sessionid_hashtbl(sessionid, net);
if (!session)
goto out;
+ clp = session->se_client;
+ if (clp && nfs4_is_courtesy_client_expired(clp)) {
+ session = NULL;
+ goto out;
+ }
status = nfsd4_get_session_locked(session);
- if (status)
+ if (status) {
session = NULL;
+ if (clp && test_bit(NFSD4_CLIENT_COURTESY, &clp->cl_flags))
By the way, I don’t understand why this checks CLIENT_COURTESY to see if the clp should be discarded. Shouldn’t it check CLIENT_RECONNECTED like the other sites?
Thanks, this should check for CLIENT_RECONNECTED as described
in the commit message.
+ nfsd4_discard_courtesy_clnt(clp);
+ }
Here and above: I'm not seeing how @clp can be NULL, but I'm kind
of new to fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c.
it seems like @clp can not be NULL since existing code does not
check for it. I will remove it to avoid any confusion. Can this
be done as a separate clean up patch?
I don’t think this series is going to make v5.18. We can keep working on improving each of the patches. And I would rather ensure that the series is properly bisectable. I don’t think we’re at a point where the patches are immutable.
okay, I will submit v16 to address review comments.
-Dai
