Ocfs2 devel - Jun 2020 - [PATCH 1/4] ocfs2: avoid inode removed while nfsd access it

On 2020/6/17 02:38, Junxiao Bi wrote:
> When nfsd is getting file dentry using handle or parent dentry of some
> dentry, one cluster lock is used to avoid inode removed from other node,
> but it still could be removed from local node, so use a rw lock to avoid
> this.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Junxiao Bi <junxiao.bi at oracle.com>
Reviewed-by: Joseph Qi <joseph.qi at
linux.alibaba.com>
> ---
>  fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
>  fs/ocfs2/ocfs2.h   |  1 +
>  2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c b/fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c
> index 152a0fc4e905..751bc4dc7466 100644
> --- a/fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c
> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c
> @@ -689,6 +689,12 @@ static void ocfs2_nfs_sync_lock_res_init(struct
ocfs2_lock_res *res,
>  				   &ocfs2_nfs_sync_lops, osb);
>  }
>  
> +static void ocfs2_nfs_sync_lock_init(struct ocfs2_super *osb)
> +{
> +	ocfs2_nfs_sync_lock_res_init(&osb->osb_nfs_sync_lockres, osb);
> +	init_rwsem(&osb->nfs_sync_rwlock);
> +}
> +
>  void ocfs2_trim_fs_lock_res_init(struct ocfs2_super *osb)
>  {
>  	struct ocfs2_lock_res *lockres = &osb->osb_trim_fs_lockres;
> @@ -2855,6 +2861,11 @@ int ocfs2_nfs_sync_lock(struct ocfs2_super *osb, int
ex)
>  	if (ocfs2_is_hard_readonly(osb))
>  		return -EROFS;
>  
> +	if (ex)
> +		down_write(&osb->nfs_sync_rwlock);
> +	else
> +		down_read(&osb->nfs_sync_rwlock);
> +
>  	if (ocfs2_mount_local(osb))
>  		return 0;
>  
> @@ -2873,6 +2884,10 @@ void ocfs2_nfs_sync_unlock(struct ocfs2_super *osb,
int ex)
>  	if (!ocfs2_mount_local(osb))
>  		ocfs2_cluster_unlock(osb, lockres,
>  				     ex ? LKM_EXMODE : LKM_PRMODE);
> +	if (ex)
> +		up_write(&osb->nfs_sync_rwlock);
> +	else
> +		up_read(&osb->nfs_sync_rwlock);
>  }
>  
>  int ocfs2_trim_fs_lock(struct ocfs2_super *osb,
> @@ -3340,7 +3355,7 @@ int ocfs2_dlm_init(struct ocfs2_super *osb)
>  local:
>  	ocfs2_super_lock_res_init(&osb->osb_super_lockres, osb);
>  	ocfs2_rename_lock_res_init(&osb->osb_rename_lockres, osb);
> -	ocfs2_nfs_sync_lock_res_init(&osb->osb_nfs_sync_lockres, osb);
> +	ocfs2_nfs_sync_lock_init(osb);
>  	ocfs2_orphan_scan_lock_res_init(&osb->osb_orphan_scan.os_lockres,
osb);
>  
>  	osb->cconn = conn;
> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/ocfs2.h b/fs/ocfs2/ocfs2.h
> index ee5d98516212..2dd71d626196 100644
> --- a/fs/ocfs2/ocfs2.h
> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/ocfs2.h
> @@ -395,6 +395,7 @@ struct ocfs2_super
>  	struct ocfs2_lock_res osb_super_lockres;
>  	struct ocfs2_lock_res osb_rename_lockres;
>  	struct ocfs2_lock_res osb_nfs_sync_lockres;
> +	struct rw_semaphore nfs_sync_rwlock;
>  	struct ocfs2_lock_res osb_trim_fs_lockres;
>  	struct mutex obs_trim_fs_mutex;
>  	struct ocfs2_dlm_debug *osb_dlm_debug;
>

On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 11:01:12 +0800 Joseph Qi <joseph.qi at
linux.alibaba.com> wrote:
> On 2020/6/17 02:38, Junxiao Bi wrote:
> > When nfsd is getting file dentry using handle or parent dentry of some
> > dentry, one cluster lock is used to avoid inode removed from other
node,
> > but it still could be removed from local node, so use a rw lock to
avoid
> > this.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Junxiao Bi <junxiao.bi at oracle.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Joseph Qi <joseph.qi at linux.alibaba.com>
Which kernel version(s) do we think need these four patches?  5.9? 
5.8?  5.8 and -stable?