[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <176419027888.634289.8284458326359928729@noble.neil.brown.name>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2025 07:51:18 +1100
From: NeilBrown <neilb@...mail.net>
To: "Amir Goldstein" <amir73il@...il.com>
Cc: "Christian Brauner" <brauner@...nel.org>,
"Jeff Layton" <jlayton@...nel.org>,
"kernel test robot" <oliver.sang@...el.com>, oe-lkp@...ts.linux.dev,
lkp@...el.com, netfs@...ts.linux.dev, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [linux-next:master] [VFS/nfsd/cachefiles/ovl] 7ab96df840:
WARNING:at_fs/dcache.c:#umount_check
On Wed, 26 Nov 2025, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 11:42 AM Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 09:48:18PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > kernel test robot noticed "WARNING:at_fs/dcache.c:#umount_check" on:
> > >
> > > commit: 7ab96df840e60eb933abfe65fc5fe44e72f16dc0 ("VFS/nfsd/cachefiles/ovl: add start_creating() and end_creating()")
> > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
> > >
> > > [test failed on linux-next/master d724c6f85e80a23ed46b7ebc6e38b527c09d64f5]
> >
> > Neil, can you please take a look at this soon?
> > I plan on sending the batch of PRs for this cycle on Friday.
> >
> > >
> > > in testcase: filebench
> > > version: filebench-x86_64-22620e6-1_20251009
> > > with following parameters:
> > >
> > > disk: 1SSD
> > > fs: ext4
> > > fs2: nfsv4
> > > test: ratelimcopyfiles.f
> > > cpufreq_governor: performance
> > >
>
> Test is copying to nfsv4 so that's the immediate suspect.
> WARN_ON is in unmount of ext4, but I suspect that nfs
> was loop mounted for the test.
>
> FWIW, nfsd_proc_create() looks very suspicious.
>
> nfsd_create_locked() does end_creating() internally (internal API change)
> but nfsd_create_locked() still does end_creating() regardless.
Thanks for looking at this Amir. That omission in nfsproc.c is
certainly part of the problem but not all of it.
By skipping the end_creating() there, we avoid a duplicate unlock, but
also lose a dput() which we need. Both callers of nfsd_create_locked()
have the same problem.
I think this should fix it. The resulting code is a bit ugly but I can
fix that with the nfsd team once this gets upstream.
(FYI nfsd_proc_create() is only used for NFSv2 and as it was an nfsv4 test,
that could wouldn't have been run)
Thanks,
NeilBrown
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfsproc.c b/fs/nfsd/nfsproc.c
index 28f03a6a3cc3..481e789a7697 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfsproc.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfsproc.c
@@ -407,6 +407,9 @@ nfsd_proc_create(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
/* File doesn't exist. Create it and set attrs */
resp->status = nfsd_create_locked(rqstp, dirfhp, &attrs, type,
rdev, newfhp);
+ /* nfsd_create_locked() unlocked the parent */
+ dput(dchild);
+ goto out_write;
} else if (type == S_IFREG) {
dprintk("nfsd: existing %s, valid=%x, size=%ld\n",
argp->name, attr->ia_valid, (long) attr->ia_size);
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/vfs.c b/fs/nfsd/vfs.c
index 145f1c8d124d..4688f3fd59e2 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/vfs.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/vfs.c
@@ -1633,16 +1633,14 @@ nfsd_create(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct svc_fh *fhp,
return nfserrno(host_err);
err = fh_compose(resfhp, fhp->fh_export, dchild, fhp);
- /*
- * We unconditionally drop our ref to dchild as fh_compose will have
- * already grabbed its own ref for it.
- */
if (err)
goto out_unlock;
err = fh_fill_pre_attrs(fhp);
if (err != nfs_ok)
goto out_unlock;
err = nfsd_create_locked(rqstp, fhp, attrs, type, rdev, resfhp);
+ /* nfsd_create_locked() unlocked the parent */
+ dput(dchild);
return err;
out_unlock:
Powered by blists - more mailing lists