diff options
| author | NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> | 2006-10-02 11:17:53 +0200 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Linus Torvalds <torvalds@g5.osdl.org> | 2006-10-02 16:57:18 +0200 |
| commit | 4a3ae42dc312dbdffee803efaf393421b79f997a (patch) | |
| tree | d18249c89fc1a5ab273beec1639cde769a0b6e96 /fs/lockd | |
| parent | [PATCH] knfsd: Move makesock failed warning into make_socks. (diff) | |
| download | linux-4a3ae42dc312dbdffee803efaf393421b79f997a.tar.xz linux-4a3ae42dc312dbdffee803efaf393421b79f997a.zip | |
[PATCH] knfsd: Correctly handle error condition from lockd_up
If lockd_up fails - what should we expect? Do we have to later call
lockd_down?
Well the nfs client thinks "no", the nfs server thinks "yes". lockd thinks
"yes".
The only answer that really makes sense is "no" !!
So:
Make lockd_up only increment nlmsvc_users on success.
Make nfsd handle errors from lockd_up properly.
Make sure lockd_up(0) never fails when lockd is running
so that the 'reclaimer' call to lockd_up doesn't need to
be error checked.
Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'fs/lockd')
| -rw-r--r-- | fs/lockd/clntlock.c | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | fs/lockd/svc.c | 12 |
2 files changed, 6 insertions, 8 deletions
diff --git a/fs/lockd/clntlock.c b/fs/lockd/clntlock.c index 6abb465b650f..87e1d03e8267 100644 --- a/fs/lockd/clntlock.c +++ b/fs/lockd/clntlock.c @@ -202,7 +202,7 @@ reclaimer(void *ptr) /* This one ensures that our parent doesn't terminate while the * reclaim is in progress */ lock_kernel(); - lockd_up(0); + lockd_up(0); /* note: this cannot fail as lockd is already running */ nlmclnt_prepare_reclaim(host); /* First, reclaim all locks that have been marked. */ diff --git a/fs/lockd/svc.c b/fs/lockd/svc.c index 448768b52913..3cc369e5693f 100644 --- a/fs/lockd/svc.c +++ b/fs/lockd/svc.c @@ -254,15 +254,11 @@ lockd_up(int proto) /* Maybe add a 'family' option when IPv6 is supported ?? */ mutex_lock(&nlmsvc_mutex); /* - * Unconditionally increment the user count ... this is - * the number of clients who _want_ a lockd process. - */ - nlmsvc_users++; - /* * Check whether we're already up and running. */ if (nlmsvc_pid) { - error = make_socks(nlmsvc_serv, proto); + if (proto) + error = make_socks(nlmsvc_serv, proto); goto out; } @@ -270,7 +266,7 @@ lockd_up(int proto) /* Maybe add a 'family' option when IPv6 is supported ?? */ * Sanity check: if there's no pid, * we should be the first user ... */ - if (nlmsvc_users > 1) + if (nlmsvc_users) printk(KERN_WARNING "lockd_up: no pid, %d users??\n", nlmsvc_users); @@ -302,6 +298,8 @@ lockd_up(int proto) /* Maybe add a 'family' option when IPv6 is supported ?? */ destroy_and_out: svc_destroy(serv); out: + if (!error) + nlmsvc_users++; mutex_unlock(&nlmsvc_mutex); return error; } |