From: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
To: Li Lingfeng <lilingfeng3@huawei.com>,
jlayton@kernel.org, neil@brown.name, okorniev@redhat.com,
Dai.Ngo@oracle.com, tom@talpey.com, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: yukuai1@huaweicloud.com, houtao1@huawei.com, yi.zhang@huawei.com,
yangerkun@huawei.com, lilingfeng@huaweicloud.com,
zhangjian496@huawei.com, bcodding@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] nfsd: remove long-standing revoked delegations by force
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2025 09:17:30 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c7eb3af2-9b00-49f0-9baf-9e9dbd27278b@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251010034333.670068-1-lilingfeng3@huawei.com>
On 10/9/25 11:43 PM, Li Lingfeng wrote:
> When file access conflicts occur between clients, the server recalls
> delegations. If the client holding delegation fails to return it after
> a recall, nfs4_laundromat adds the delegation to cl_revoked list.
> This causes subsequent SEQUENCE operations to set the
> SEQ4_STATUS_RECALLABLE_STATE_REVOKED flag, forcing the client to
> validate all delegations and return the revoked one.
>
> However, if the client fails to return the delegation like this:
> nfs4_laundromat nfsd4_delegreturn
> unhash_delegation_locked
> list_add // add dp to reaplist
> // by dl_recall_lru
> list_del_init // delete dp from
> // reaplist
> destroy_delegation
> unhash_delegation_locked
> // do nothing but return false
> revoke_delegation
> list_add // add dp to cl_revoked
> // by dl_recall_lru
>
> The delegation will remain in the server's cl_revoked list while the
> client marks it revoked and won't find it upon detecting
> SEQ4_STATUS_RECALLABLE_STATE_REVOKED.
> This leads to a loop:
> the server persistently sets SEQ4_STATUS_RECALLABLE_STATE_REVOKED, and the
> client repeatedly tests all delegations, severely impacting performance
> when numerous delegations exist.
>
> Since abnormal delegations are removed from flc_lease via nfs4_laundromat
> --> revoke_delegation --> destroy_unhashed_deleg -->
> nfs4_unlock_deleg_lease --> kernel_setlease, and do not block new open
> requests indefinitely, retaining such a delegation on the server is
> unnecessary.
>
> Reported-by: Zhang Jian <zhangjian496@huawei.com>
> Fixes: 3bd64a5ba171 ("nfsd4: implement SEQ4_STATUS_RECALLABLE_STATE_REVOKED")
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/ff8debe9-6877-4cf7-ba29-fc98eae0ffa0@huawei.com/
> Signed-off-by: Li Lingfeng <lilingfeng3@huawei.com>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> 1) Set SC_STATUS_CLOSED unconditionally in destroy_delegation();
> 2) Determine whether to remove the delegation based on SC_STATUS_CLOSED,
> rather than by timeout;
> 3) Modify the commit message.
>
> Changes in v3:
> 1) Move variables used for traversal inside the if statement;
> 2) Add a comment to explain why we have to do this;
> 3) Move the second check of cl_revoked inside the if statement of
> the first check.
>
> Changes in v4:
> Stuff dp onto a local list under the protect of cl_lock and put all
> the items later.
> fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> index 81fa7cc6c77b..30fed3845fa1 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> @@ -1373,6 +1373,11 @@ static void destroy_delegation(struct nfs4_delegation *dp)
>
> spin_lock(&state_lock);
> unhashed = unhash_delegation_locked(dp, SC_STATUS_CLOSED);
> + /*
> + * Unconditionally set SC_STATUS_CLOSED, regardless of whether the
> + * delegation is hashed, to mark the current delegation as invalid.
> + */
> + dp->dl_stid.sc_status |= SC_STATUS_CLOSED;
> spin_unlock(&state_lock);
> if (unhashed)
> destroy_unhashed_deleg(dp);
> @@ -4507,8 +4512,40 @@ nfsd4_sequence(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
> default:
> seq->status_flags = 0;
> }
> - if (!list_empty(&clp->cl_revoked))
> - seq->status_flags |= SEQ4_STATUS_RECALLABLE_STATE_REVOKED;
> + if (!list_empty(&clp->cl_revoked)) {
> + struct list_head *pos, *next, reaplist;
Declare reaplist with:
LIST_HEAD(reaplist);
Then you don't need the INIT_LIST_HEAD(reaplist); below.
> + struct nfs4_delegation *dp;
> +
> + /*
> + * Concurrent nfs4_laundromat() and nfsd4_delegreturn()
> + * may add a delegation to cl_revoked even after the
> + * client has returned it, causing persistent
> + * SEQ4_STATUS_RECALLABLE_STATE_REVOKED, disrupting normal
> + * operations.
> + * Remove delegations with SC_STATUS_CLOSED from cl_revoked
> + * to resolve.
> + */
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&reaplist);
> + spin_lock(&clp->cl_lock);
> + list_for_each_safe(pos, next, &clp->cl_revoked) {
> + dp = list_entry(pos, struct nfs4_delegation, dl_recall_lru);
> + if (dp->dl_stid.sc_status & SC_STATUS_CLOSED) {
> + list_del_init(&dp->dl_recall_lru);
> + list_add(&dp->dl_recall_lru, &reaplist);
> + }
> + }
> + spin_unlock(&clp->cl_lock);
Yep, this follows the same form used elsewhere in nfs4state.c.
> +
> + while (!list_empty(&reaplist)) {
> + dp = list_first_entry(&reaplist, struct nfs4_delegation,
> + dl_recall_lru);
> + list_del_init(&dp->dl_recall_lru);
> + nfs4_put_stid(&dp->dl_stid);
> + }
> +
> + if (!list_empty(&clp->cl_revoked))
> + seq->status_flags |= SEQ4_STATUS_RECALLABLE_STATE_REVOKED;
Is this checking if cl_revoked still has remaining revoked state? If
yes, a brief comment to that effect would be helpful.
> + }
> if (atomic_read(&clp->cl_admin_revoked))
> seq->status_flags |= SEQ4_STATUS_ADMIN_STATE_REVOKED;
> trace_nfsd_seq4_status(rqstp, seq);
--
Chuck Lever
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-10 13:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-10 3:43 Li Lingfeng
2025-10-10 13:17 ` Chuck Lever [this message]
2025-10-10 19:30 ` Jeff Layton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=c7eb3af2-9b00-49f0-9baf-9e9dbd27278b@oracle.com \
--to=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=Dai.Ngo@oracle.com \
--cc=bcodding@redhat.com \
--cc=houtao1@huawei.com \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=lilingfeng3@huawei.com \
--cc=lilingfeng@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neil@brown.name \
--cc=okorniev@redhat.com \
--cc=tom@talpey.com \
--cc=yangerkun@huawei.com \
--cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
--cc=yukuai1@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=zhangjian496@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®