This patch checks on -EBUSY for dlm_unlock() for non CANCEL or
FORCEUNLOCK case validation at first. Similar like it's done for
dlm_lock(). Although the current way looks okay we should anyway
moving the -EBUSY check at first after doing a check on -EINVAL
regarding to the lkb state. If new -EINVAL checks are added it
should be considered that some lkb fields are in a stable state
only when the lkb is in a non -EBUSY state. This patch is trying to
avoid such future mistake.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Aring <aahri...@redhat.com>
---
fs/dlm/lock.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/dlm/lock.c b/fs/dlm/lock.c
index 7d5f94867e45..75313435b39d 100644
--- a/fs/dlm/lock.c
+++ b/fs/dlm/lock.c
@@ -2928,23 +2928,12 @@ static int validate_lock_args(struct dlm_ls *ls, struct
dlm_lkb *lkb,
static int validate_unlock_args(struct dlm_lkb *lkb, struct dlm_args *args)
{
struct dlm_ls *ls = lkb->lkb_resource->res_ls;
- int rv = -EINVAL;
-
- if (lkb->lkb_flags & DLM_IFL_MSTCPY) {
- log_error(ls, "unlock on MSTCPY %x", lkb->lkb_id);
- dlm_print_lkb(lkb);
- goto out;
- }
-
- /* an lkb may still exist even though the lock is EOL'ed due to a
- cancel, unlock or failed noqueue request; an app can't use these
- locks; return same error as if the lkid had not been found at all */
+ int rv = -EBUSY;
- if (lkb->lkb_flags & DLM_IFL_ENDOFLIFE) {
- log_debug(ls, "unlock on ENDOFLIFE %x", lkb->lkb_id);
- rv = -ENOENT;
+ /* normal unlock not allowed if there's any op in progress */
+ if (!(args->flags & (DLM_LKF_CANCEL | DLM_LKF_FORCEUNLOCK)) &&
+ (lkb->lkb_wait_type || lkb->lkb_wait_count))
goto out;
- }
/* an lkb may be waiting for an rsb lookup to complete where the
lookup was initiated by another lock */
@@ -2959,7 +2948,24 @@ static int validate_unlock_args(struct dlm_lkb *lkb,
struct dlm_args *args)
unhold_lkb(lkb); /* undoes create_lkb() */
}
/* caller changes -EBUSY to 0 for CANCEL and FORCEUNLOCK */
- rv = -EBUSY;
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ rv = -EINVAL;
+ if (lkb->lkb_flags & DLM_IFL_MSTCPY) {
+ log_error(ls, "unlock on MSTCPY %x", lkb->lkb_id);
+ dlm_print_lkb(lkb);
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ /* an lkb may still exist even though the lock is EOL'ed due to a
+ * cancel, unlock or failed noqueue request; an app can't use these
+ * locks; return same error as if the lkid had not been found at all
+ */
+
+ if (lkb->lkb_flags & DLM_IFL_ENDOFLIFE) {
+ log_debug(ls, "unlock on ENDOFLIFE %x", lkb->lkb_id);
+ rv = -ENOENT;
goto out;
}
@@ -3032,14 +3038,8 @@ static int validate_unlock_args(struct dlm_lkb *lkb,
struct dlm_args *args)
goto out;
}
/* add_to_waiters() will set OVERLAP_UNLOCK */
- goto out_ok;
}
- /* normal unlock not allowed if there's any op in progress */
- rv = -EBUSY;
- if (lkb->lkb_wait_type || lkb->lkb_wait_count)
- goto out;
-
out_ok:
/* an overlapping op shouldn't blow away exflags from other op */
lkb->lkb_exflags |= args->flags;
--
2.31.1
