On 4 Aug 2023, at 11:33, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Fri, 2023-08-04 at 11:02 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 10:52:20AM -0400, Benjamin Coddington wrote: >>> We have some reports of linux NFS clients that cannot satisfy a linux knfsd >>> server that always sets SEQ4_STATUS_RECALLABLE_STATE_REVOKED even though >>> those clients repeatedly walk all their known state using TEST_STATEID and >>> receive NFS4_OK for all. >>> >>> Its possible for revoke_delegation() to set NFS4_REVOKED_DELEG_STID, then >>> nfsd4_free_stateid() finds the delegation and returns NFS4_OK to >>> FREE_STATEID. Afterward, revoke_delegation() moves the same delegation to >>> cl_revoked. This would produce the observed client/server effect. >>> >>> Fix this by ensuring that the setting of sc_type to NFS4_REVOKED_DELEG_STID >>> and move to cl_revoked happens within the same cl_lock. This will allow >>> nfsd4_free_stateid() to properly remove the delegation from cl_revoked. >>> >>> Link: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2217103 >>> Link: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2176575 >>> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Hi Ben, does this fix deserve: >> >> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx # v4.17+ >> >> ?? >> > > What's special about v4.17? Is there a patch that broke it that went > into that release? Before 0af6e690f0d4e the patch won't apply. Ben
