Looks good to me, tested against Ganesha and the updated patch passes. Frank > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Layton [mailto:jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 4:24 AM > To: calum.mackay@xxxxxxxxxx > Cc: bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx; ffilzlnx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > Frank Filz <ffilz@xxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: [pynfs PATCH v2 5/5] LOCK24: fix the lock_seqid in second lock request > > This test currently fails against Linux nfsd, but I think it's the test that's wrong. It > basically does: > > open for read > read lock > unlock > open upgrade > write lock > > The write lock above is sent with a lock_seqid of 0, which is wrong. > RFC7530/16.10.5 says: > > o In the case in which the state has been created and the [new > lockowner] boolean is true, the server rejects the request with the > error NFS4ERR_BAD_SEQID. The only exception is where there is a > retransmission of a previous request in which the boolean was > true. In this case, the lock_seqid will match the original > request, and the response will reflect the final case, below. > > Since the above is not a retransmission, knfsd is correct to reject this call. This > patch fixes the open_sequence object to track the lock seqid and set it correctly > in the LOCK request. > > With this, LOCK24 passes against knfsd. > > Cc: Frank Filz <ffilz@xxxxxxxxxx> > Fixes: 4299316fb357 (Add LOCK24 test case to test open uprgade/downgrade > scenario) > Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > nfs4.0/servertests/st_lock.py | 6 +++++- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/nfs4.0/servertests/st_lock.py b/nfs4.0/servertests/st_lock.py index > 468672403ffe..9d650ab017b9 100644 > --- a/nfs4.0/servertests/st_lock.py > +++ b/nfs4.0/servertests/st_lock.py > @@ -886,6 +886,7 @@ class open_sequence: > self.client = client > self.owner = owner > self.lockowner = lockowner > + self.lockseqid = 0 > def open(self, access): > self.fh, self.stateid = self.client.create_confirm(self.owner, > access=access, > @@ -900,14 +901,17 @@ class open_sequence: > self.client.close_file(self.owner, self.fh, self.stateid) > def lock(self, type): > res = self.client.lock_file(self.owner, self.fh, self.stateid, > - type=type, lockowner=self.lockowner) > + type=type, lockowner=self.lockowner, > + lockseqid=self.lockseqid) > check(res) > if res.status == NFS4_OK: > self.lockstateid = res.lockid > + self.lockseqid += 1 > def unlock(self): > res = self.client.unlock_file(1, self.fh, self.lockstateid) > if res.status == NFS4_OK: > self.lockstateid = res.lockid > + self.lockseqid += 1 > > def testOpenUpgradeLock(t, env): > """Try open, lock, open, downgrade, close > -- > 2.39.2
