On Mon, Nov 16 2020, Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Mon, 2020-11-16 at 13:59 +1100, NeilBrown wrote: >> >> Prior to commit 5ceb9d7fdaaf ("NFS: Refactor >> nfs_lookup_revalidate()") >> and error from nfs_lookup_verify_inode() other than -ESTALE would >> result >> in nfs_lookup_revalidate() returning that error code (-ESTALE is >> mapped >> to zero). >> Since that commit, all errors result in zero being returned. >> >> When nfs_lookup_revalidate() returns zero, the dentry is invalidated >> and, significantly, if the dentry is a directory that is mounted on, >> that mountpoint is lost. >> >> If you: >> - mount an NFS filesystem which contains a directory >> - mount something (e.g. tmpfs) on that directory >> - use iptables (or scissors) to block traffic to the server >> - ls -l the-mounted-on-directory >> - interrupt the 'ls -l' >> you will find that the directory has been unmounted. >> >> This can be fixed by returning the actual error code from >> nfs_lookup_verify_inode() rather then zero (except for -ESTALE). >> >> Fixes: 5ceb9d7fdaaf ("NFS: Refactor nfs_lookup_revalidate()") >> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <ne...@suse.de> >> --- >> fs/nfs/dir.c | 8 +++++--- >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/nfs/dir.c b/fs/nfs/dir.c >> index cb52db9a0cfb..d24acf556e9e 100644 >> --- a/fs/nfs/dir.c >> +++ b/fs/nfs/dir.c >> @@ -1350,7 +1350,7 @@ nfs_do_lookup_revalidate(struct inode *dir, >> struct dentry *dentry, >> unsigned int flags) >> { >> struct inode *inode; >> - int error; >> + int error = 0; >> >> nfs_inc_stats(dir, NFSIOS_DENTRYREVALIDATE); >> inode = d_inode(dentry); >> @@ -1372,8 +1372,10 @@ nfs_do_lookup_revalidate(struct inode *dir, >> struct dentry *dentry, >> nfs_check_verifier(dir, dentry, flags & LOOKUP_RCU)) { >> error = nfs_lookup_verify_inode(inode, flags); >> if (error) { >> - if (error == -ESTALE) >> + if (error == -ESTALE) { >> nfs_zap_caches(dir); >> + error = 0; >> + } >> goto out_bad; >> } >> nfs_advise_use_readdirplus(dir); >> @@ -1395,7 +1397,7 @@ nfs_do_lookup_revalidate(struct inode *dir, >> struct dentry *dentry, >> out_bad: >> if (flags & LOOKUP_RCU) >> return -ECHILD; >> - return nfs_lookup_revalidate_done(dir, dentry, inode, 0); >> + return nfs_lookup_revalidate_done(dir, dentry, inode, error); > > Which errors do we actually need to return here? As far as I can tell, > the only errors that nfs_lookup_verify_inode() is supposed to return is > ENOMEM, ESTALE, ECHILD, and possibly EIO or ETiMEDOUT. > > Why would it be better to return those errors rather than just a 0 when > we need to invalidate the inode, particularly since we already have a > special case in nfs_lookup_revalidate_done() when the dentry is root?
ERESTARTSYS is the error that easily causes problems. Returning 0 causes d_invalidate() to be called which is quite heavy handed in mountpoints. So it is only reasonable to return 0 when we have unambiguous confirmation from the server that the object no longer exists. ESTALE is unambiguous. EIO might be unambiguous. ERESTARTSYS, ENOMEM, ETIMEDOUT are transient and don't justify d_invalidate() being called. (BTW, Commit cc89684c9a26 ("NFS: only invalidate dentrys that are clearly invalid.") fixed much the same bug 3 years ago). Thanks, NeilBrown > >> } >> >> static int > > -- > Trond Myklebust > Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace > trond.mykleb...@hammerspace.com
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature