[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1232651764-10799-3-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 14:16:04 -0500
From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
bfields@...ldses.org, cluster-devel@...hat.com, teigland@...hat.com
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] nfsd: only set file_lock.fl_lmops in nfsd4_lockt if a stateowner is found
nfsd4_lockt does a search for a lockstateowner when building the lock
struct to test. If one is found, it'll set fl_owner to it. Regardless of
whether that happens, it'll also set fl_lmops. Given that this lock is
basically a "lightweight" lock that's just used for checking conflicts,
setting fl_lmops is probably not appropriate for it.
This behavior exposed a bug in DLM's GETLK implementation where it
wasn't clearing out the fields in the file_lock before filling in
conflicting lock info. While we were able to fix this in DLM, it
still seems pointless and dangerous to set the fl_lmops this way
when we may have a NULL lockstateowner.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
---
fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 1 -
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
index 88db7d3..b6f60f4 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
@@ -2871,7 +2871,6 @@ nfsd4_lockt(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
file_lock.fl_owner = (fl_owner_t)lockt->lt_stateowner;
file_lock.fl_pid = current->tgid;
file_lock.fl_flags = FL_POSIX;
- file_lock.fl_lmops = &nfsd_posix_mng_ops;
file_lock.fl_start = lockt->lt_offset;
file_lock.fl_end = last_byte_offset(lockt->lt_offset, lockt->lt_length);
--
1.5.5.6
--
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