On Tue, 2025-03-25 at 18:48 +0000, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Tue, 2025-03-25 at 13:59 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > On Tue, 2025-03-25 at 12:17 -0400, trondmy@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > If someone calls nfs_mark_client_ready(clp, status) with a negative
> > > value for status, then that should signal that the nfs_client is no
> > > longer valid.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > fs/nfs/nfs4state.c | 4 ++--
> > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c
> > > index 542cdf71229f..738eb2789266 100644
> > > --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c
> > > +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c
> > > @@ -1198,7 +1198,7 @@ void nfs4_schedule_state_manager(struct
> > > nfs_client *clp)
> > > struct rpc_clnt *clnt = clp->cl_rpcclient;
> > > bool swapon = false;
> > >
> > > - if (clnt->cl_shutdown)
> > > + if (clnt->cl_shutdown || clp->cl_cons_state < 0)
> >
> > Would it be simpler to just set cl_shutdown when this occurs instead
> > of
> > having to check cl_cons_state as well?
>
> Do we need the check for clnt->cl_shutdown at all here? I'd expect any
> caller of this function to already hold a reference to the client,
> which means that the RPC client should still be up.
Not necessarily? Just because you hold a reference to the rpc_clnt
doesn't mean that it's still up, AFAIU.
For instance, if you end up using the "shutdown" file in sysfs, any RPC
still in flight will hold a reference to the client. Writing to
"shutdown" will set cl_shutdown to 1 and then cancel all the RPCs, but
there is at least a window of time where we have an elevated refcount
but the client is no longer valid.
>
> I'm a little suspicious of the check in nfs41_sequence_call_done() too.
>
Me too. I think this is probably an indicator that we need to carefully
audit how cl_shutdown is used and clarify what it means. Luckily there
are only a handful of places that reference it:
The call_start check is fine I thinkhhuhdljkfjltkuddjrig, though maybe
we should add cl_shutdown checks in later states? The other places that
check it come from this commit:
6ad477a69ad8 NFSv4: Clean up some shutdown loops
Should we convert both of those checks to look at clp->cl_cons_state
instead?
> >
> > > return;
> > >
> > > set_bit(NFS4CLNT_RUN_MANAGER, &clp->cl_state);
> > > @@ -1403,7 +1403,7 @@ int nfs4_schedule_stateid_recovery(const
> > > struct nfs_server *server, struct nfs4_
> > > dprintk("%s: scheduling stateid recovery for server %s\n",
> > > __func__,
> > > clp->cl_hostname);
> > > nfs4_schedule_state_manager(clp);
> > > - return 0;
> > > + return clp->cl_cons_state < 0 ? clp->cl_cons_state : 0;
> > > }
> > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(nfs4_schedule_stateid_recovery);
> > >
> >
>
> --
> Trond Myklebust
> Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace
> trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
