On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 02:16:04PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> nfsd4_lockt does a search for a lockstateowner when building the lock
> struct to test. If one is found, it'll set fl_owner to it. Regardless of
> whether that happens, it'll also set fl_lmops. Given that this lock is
> basically a "lightweight" lock that's just used for checking conflicts,
> setting fl_lmops is probably not appropriate for it.
> 
> This behavior exposed a bug in DLM's GETLK implementation where it
> wasn't clearing out the fields in the file_lock before filling in
> conflicting lock info. While we were able to fix this in DLM, it
> still seems pointless and dangerous to set the fl_lmops this way
> when we may have a NULL lockstateowner.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <[email protected]>

Thanks, applied.--b.

> ---
>  fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c |    1 -
>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> index 88db7d3..b6f60f4 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> @@ -2871,7 +2871,6 @@ nfsd4_lockt(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct 
> nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
>               file_lock.fl_owner = (fl_owner_t)lockt->lt_stateowner;
>       file_lock.fl_pid = current->tgid;
>       file_lock.fl_flags = FL_POSIX;
> -     file_lock.fl_lmops = &nfsd_posix_mng_ops;
>  
>       file_lock.fl_start = lockt->lt_offset;
>       file_lock.fl_end = last_byte_offset(lockt->lt_offset, lockt->lt_length);
> -- 
> 1.5.5.6
> 

Reply via email to