[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48C791F9.8090606@fr.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 11:23:05 +0200
From: Cedric Le Goater <clg@...ibm.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
CC: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] sunrpc: fix oops in rpc_create() when the mount
namespace is unshared
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com> writes:
>
>> If the upper layers are responsible for providing the utsname, you will need to
>> fix up lockd and the NFS server's callback client too, at least.
>
> Actually looking at the code. It looks like a proper fix may be even simpler.
> Why do we have both clnt->cl_server and clnt->cl_nodename? Or is cl_server
> the other side of the connection?
>
>>>> What are we trying to achieve by reading utsname?
>>> It looks like it gets copied into the sunrpc messages so I assume it is
>>> a part of the sunrpc spec?
>> It appears to be used only for RPC's AUTH_SYS credentials. The nodename is used
>> to identify the caller's host. See RFC 1831, Appendix A:
>>
>> http://rfclibrary.hosting.com/rfc/rfc1831/rfc1831-16.asp
>
> Thanks that helps a lot.
>
>> I'm not terribly familiar with uts namespaces, though. Can someone explain why
>> we need to distinguish between these for AUTH_SYS if the caller is on a remote
>> system?
>
> Semantically processes in different uts namespaces are on different machines.
>
>> I don't like the idea of an oops in here. Instead, (for now) it should warn and
>> fail to create the client, IMO.
>
> Which is interesting when the problem happens during NFS unmount. Although
> frankly it could fail anyway.
>
> It seems strange that we are creating a client during unmount anyway.
the task exiting brings down the lockd thread and unregisters the lockd service
with the portmapper. This is done with a rpc call which creates a client and a
request.
that's how I understand the code and the oops.
C.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists