Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.20 65/77] CIFS: Do not assume one credit for async responses

[Pavel Shilovsky]

ÑÑ, 27 ÑÐÐÑ. 2019 Ð. Ð 09:54, Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 08:10:47PM +0000, Pavel Shilovskiy wrote:
> >ÑÑ, 14 ÑÐÐÑ. 2019 Ð. Ð 18:40, Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> >>
> >> From: Pavel Shilovsky <pshilov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> [ Upstream commit 0fd1d37b0501efc6e295f56ab55cdaff784aa50c ]
> >>
> >> If we don't receive a response we can't assume that the server
> >> granted one credit. Assume zero credits in such cases.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Pavel Shilovsky <pshilov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Reviewed-by: Ronnie Sahlberg <lsahlber@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Signed-off-by: Steve French <stfrench@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >>  fs/cifs/smb2pdu.c | 15 +++++++++++----
> >>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/fs/cifs/smb2pdu.c b/fs/cifs/smb2pdu.c
> >> index d1ae7cdb236d..3c44c51310c4 100644
> >> --- a/fs/cifs/smb2pdu.c
> >> +++ b/fs/cifs/smb2pdu.c
> >> @@ -2834,9 +2834,10 @@ smb2_echo_callback(struct mid_q_entry *mid)
> >>  {
> >>         struct TCP_Server_Info *server = mid->callback_data;
> >>         struct smb2_echo_rsp *rsp = (struct smb2_echo_rsp *)mid->resp_buf;
> >> -       unsigned int credits_received = 1;
> >> +       unsigned int credits_received = 0;
> >>
> >> -       if (mid->mid_state == MID_RESPONSE_RECEIVED)
> >> +       if (mid->mid_state == MID_RESPONSE_RECEIVED
> >> +           || mid->mid_state == MID_RESPONSE_MALFORMED)
> >>                 credits_received = le16_to_cpu(rsp->sync_hdr.CreditRequest);
> >>
> >>         DeleteMidQEntry(mid);
> >> @@ -3093,7 +3094,7 @@ smb2_readv_callback(struct mid_q_entry *mid)
> >>         struct TCP_Server_Info *server = tcon->ses->server;
> >>         struct smb2_sync_hdr *shdr =
> >>                                 (struct smb2_sync_hdr *)rdata->iov[0].iov_base;
> >> -       unsigned int credits_received = 1;
> >> +       unsigned int credits_received = 0;
> >>         struct smb_rqst rqst = { .rq_iov = rdata->iov,
> >>                                  .rq_nvec = 2,
> >>                                  .rq_pages = rdata->pages,
> >> @@ -3132,6 +3133,9 @@ smb2_readv_callback(struct mid_q_entry *mid)
> >>                 task_io_account_read(rdata->got_bytes);
> >>                 cifs_stats_bytes_read(tcon, rdata->got_bytes);
> >>                 break;
> >> +       case MID_RESPONSE_MALFORMED:
> >> +               credits_received = le16_to_cpu(shdr->CreditRequest);
> >> +               /* fall through */
> >>         default:
> >>                 if (rdata->result != -ENODATA)
> >>                         rdata->result = -EIO;
> >> @@ -3325,7 +3329,7 @@ smb2_writev_callback(struct mid_q_entry *mid)
> >>         struct cifs_tcon *tcon = tlink_tcon(wdata->cfile->tlink);
> >>         unsigned int written;
> >>         struct smb2_write_rsp *rsp = (struct smb2_write_rsp *)mid->resp_buf;
> >> -       unsigned int credits_received = 1;
> >> +       unsigned int credits_received = 0;
> >>
> >>         switch (mid->mid_state) {
> >>         case MID_RESPONSE_RECEIVED:
> >> @@ -3353,6 +3357,9 @@ smb2_writev_callback(struct mid_q_entry *mid)
> >>         case MID_RETRY_NEEDED:
> >>                 wdata->result = -EAGAIN;
> >>                 break;
> >> +       case MID_RESPONSE_MALFORMED:
> >> +               credits_received = le16_to_cpu(rsp->sync_hdr.CreditRequest);
> >> +               /* fall through */
> >>         default:
> >>                 wdata->result = -EIO;
> >>                 break;
> >> --
> >> 2.19.1
> >>
> >
> >Can you also apply the following patch to 4.20.y and 4.19.y, please?
> >
> >https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1030180/
>
> I'll queue it up for the next cycle as it has dependencies on stable@
> commits that didn't make it in yet and I don't want to mess up with
> Greg's flow. Thanks you!

It seems that this one has already been merged to 4.20.11:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/?h=linux-4.20.y&id=7cb453e5a88169b2a5cec1e00778fc969efd1a77

So, between those two stable kernels only 4.19 doesn't have the patch.

--
Best regards,
Pavel Shilovsky