Hi Stanislav,
I test kernel with this patch, the problem has be fixed. Would you please send a
formal one? :) Thanks very much!
Weng Meiling
Thanks
On 2013/12/16 23:27, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote:
> 16.12.2013 05:26, Weng Meiling пишет:
>> I backport the patch 11f779421a39b86da8a523d97e5fd3477878d44f "nfsd:
>> containerize NFSd
>>> filesystem" and test. But I trigger a bug, this bug still exists in 3.13
>>> kernel. The following
>>> is what I do:
>>>
>>> The steps:
>>>
>>> step 1: start NFS server in init_net net ns
>>> #service nfsserver start
>>>
>>> step 2: stop NFS server in non init_net net ns
>>> #ip netns add test
>>> #ip netns list
>>> test
>>> #ip netns exec test service nfsserver stop
>>>
>>> step 3: start NFS server again in the non init_net net ns
>>> #ip netns exec test service nfsserver start
>>>
>>> This step 3 will trigger kernel panic.
>
>
> This sequence can be reduced to steps 2 and 3.
>
>
>>> The reason seems that "ip
>>> netns exec" creates a new mount namespace, the changes to the
>>> new mount namespace don't propgate to other namespaces. So
>>> when stop NFS server in second step, the NFSD filesystem isn't
>>> umounted. When restart NFS server in third step, the NFSD
>>> filesystem will not remount, this result to the NFSD file
>>> system superblock's net ns is still init_net and RPCBIND client
>>> will be NULL when register RPC service with the local portmapper
>>> in svc_addsock(). Do you have any ideas about this problem?
>>>
>
> The problem here is that on NFS server stop, RPCBIND client were destroyed
> for init_net,
> because network namespace context is being taken from NFSd superblock.
> On NFS start start rpc.nfsd process creates socket in nested net and passes
> it into "write_ports",
> which leads to NFSd creation of RPCBIND socket in init_net because of the
> same reason. An attempt
> to register passed socket in nested net leads to panic. I think, this
> collusion should be handled
> as error and can be fixed like below.
>
> BTW, it looks to me. that mounts with namespace-aware superblocks can't just
> use the same
> superblock on new mount namespace creation and should be handled in more
> complex way.
>
> Eric, Al, could you share your opinion how this problem should be solved?
>
> =======================================================================================
>
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c b/fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c
> index 7f55517..f34d9de 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c
> @@ -699,6 +699,11 @@ static ssize_t __write_ports_addfd(char *buf, struct net
> *net)
> if (err != 0 || fd < 0)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> + if (svc_alien_sock(net, fd)) {
> + printk(KERN_ERR "%s: socket net is different to NFSd's
> one\n", __func__);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> err = nfsd_create_serv(net);
> if (err != 0)
> return err;
> diff --git a/include/linux/sunrpc/svcsock.h b/include/linux/sunrpc/svcsock.h
> index 62fd1b7..947009e 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sunrpc/svcsock.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sunrpc/svcsock.h
> @@ -56,6 +56,7 @@ int svc_recv(struct svc_rqst *, long);
> int svc_send(struct svc_rqst *);
> void svc_drop(struct svc_rqst *);
> void svc_sock_update_bufs(struct svc_serv *serv);
> +bool svc_alien_sock(struct net *net, int fd);
> int svc_addsock(struct svc_serv *serv, const int fd,
> char *name_return, const size_t len);
> void svc_init_xprt_sock(void);
> diff --git a/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c b/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c
> index b6e59f0..3ba5b87 100644
> --- a/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c
> +++ b/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c
> @@ -1397,6 +1397,17 @@ static struct svc_sock *svc_setup_socket(struct
> svc_serv *serv,
> return svsk;
> }
>
> +bool svc_alien_sock(struct net *net, int fd)
> +{
> + int err;
> + struct socket *sock = sockfd_lookup(fd, &err);
> +
> + if (sock && (sock_net(sock->sk) != net))
> + return true;
> + return false;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(svc_alien_sock);
> +
> /**
> * svc_addsock - add a listener socket to an RPC service
> * @serv: pointer to RPC service to which to add a new listener
>
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
