From 4a3ae42dc312dbdffee803efaf393421b79f997a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: NeilBrown Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 02:17:53 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] [PATCH] knfsd: Correctly handle error condition from lockd_up If lockd_up fails - what should we expect? Do we have to later call lockd_down? Well the nfs client thinks "no", the nfs server thinks "yes". lockd thinks "yes". The only answer that really makes sense is "no" !! So: Make lockd_up only increment nlmsvc_users on success. Make nfsd handle errors from lockd_up properly. Make sure lockd_up(0) never fails when lockd is running so that the 'reclaimer' call to lockd_up doesn't need to be error checked. Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" Signed-off-by: Neil Brown Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds --- fs/lockd/clntlock.c | 2 +- fs/lockd/svc.c | 12 +++++------- fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c | 16 ++++++++++------ 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/lockd/clntlock.c b/fs/lockd/clntlock.c index 6abb465b650f..87e1d03e8267 100644 --- a/fs/lockd/clntlock.c +++ b/fs/lockd/clntlock.c @@ -202,7 +202,7 @@ reclaimer(void *ptr) /* This one ensures that our parent doesn't terminate while the * reclaim is in progress */ lock_kernel(); - lockd_up(0); + lockd_up(0); /* note: this cannot fail as lockd is already running */ nlmclnt_prepare_reclaim(host); /* First, reclaim all locks that have been marked. */ diff --git a/fs/lockd/svc.c b/fs/lockd/svc.c index 448768b52913..3cc369e5693f 100644 --- a/fs/lockd/svc.c +++ b/fs/lockd/svc.c @@ -253,16 +253,12 @@ lockd_up(int proto) /* Maybe add a 'family' option when IPv6 is supported ?? */ int error = 0; mutex_lock(&nlmsvc_mutex); - /* - * Unconditionally increment the user count ... this is - * the number of clients who _want_ a lockd process. - */ - nlmsvc_users++; /* * Check whether we're already up and running. */ if (nlmsvc_pid) { - error = make_socks(nlmsvc_serv, proto); + if (proto) + error = make_socks(nlmsvc_serv, proto); goto out; } @@ -270,7 +266,7 @@ lockd_up(int proto) /* Maybe add a 'family' option when IPv6 is supported ?? */ * Sanity check: if there's no pid, * we should be the first user ... */ - if (nlmsvc_users > 1) + if (nlmsvc_users) printk(KERN_WARNING "lockd_up: no pid, %d users??\n", nlmsvc_users); @@ -302,6 +298,8 @@ lockd_up(int proto) /* Maybe add a 'family' option when IPv6 is supported ?? */ destroy_and_out: svc_destroy(serv); out: + if (!error) + nlmsvc_users++; mutex_unlock(&nlmsvc_mutex); return error; } diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c b/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c index f1314c63e823..cdec3993e0d5 100644 --- a/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c @@ -221,18 +221,22 @@ static int nfsd_init_socks(int port) if (!list_empty(&nfsd_serv->sv_permsocks)) return 0; - error = svc_makesock(nfsd_serv, IPPROTO_UDP, port); - if (error < 0) - return error; error = lockd_up(IPPROTO_UDP); + if (error >= 0) { + error = svc_makesock(nfsd_serv, IPPROTO_UDP, port); + if (error < 0) + lockd_down(); + } if (error < 0) return error; #ifdef CONFIG_NFSD_TCP - error = svc_makesock(nfsd_serv, IPPROTO_TCP, port); - if (error < 0) - return error; error = lockd_up(IPPROTO_TCP); + if (error >= 0) { + error = svc_makesock(nfsd_serv, IPPROTO_TCP, port); + if (error < 0) + lockd_down(); + } if (error < 0) return error; #endif -- 2.20.1