[ 23/53] NLM: Ensure that we resend all pending blocking locks after a reclaim

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

3.0-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx>

commit 666b3d803a511fbc9bc5e5ea8ce66010cf03ea13 upstream.

Currently, nlmclnt_lock will break out of the for(;;) loop when
the reclaimer wakes up the blocking lock thread by setting
nlm_lck_denied_grace_period. This causes the lock request to fail
with an ENOLCK error.
The intention was always to ensure that we resend the lock request
after the grace period has expired.

Reported-by: Wangyuan Zhang <Wangyuan.Zhang@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

---
 fs/lockd/clntproc.c |    3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

--- a/fs/lockd/clntproc.c
+++ b/fs/lockd/clntproc.c
@@ -550,6 +550,9 @@ again:
 		status = nlmclnt_block(block, req, NLMCLNT_POLL_TIMEOUT);
 		if (status < 0)
 			break;
+		/* Resend the blocking lock request after a server reboot */
+		if (resp->status ==  nlm_lck_denied_grace_period)
+			continue;
 		if (resp->status != nlm_lck_blocked)
 			break;
 	}


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/