Re: [PATCH RFC] nfsd: set missing after_change as before_change + 1

From: Chuck Lever
Date: Mon Jul 24 2023 - 11:21:21 EST


On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 10:53:39AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> In the event that we can't fetch post_op_attr attributes, we still need
> to set a value for the after_change. The operation has already happened,
> so we're not able to return an error at that point, but we do want to
> ensure that the client knows that its cache should be invalidated.
>
> If we weren't able to fetch post-op attrs, then just set the
> after_change to before_change + 1. The atomic flag should already be
> clear in this case.
>
> Suggested-by: Neil Brown <neilb@xxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

I'm not sure this change makes any difference. The client would
possibly see the change value move forward then back. I'd think a
false "atomic" field and using the /same/ pre- and post-change would
be safer...?

But I'm intrigued enough to apply this to nfsd-next provisionally,
at least for testing and further review. It will appear a little
later today.


> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c
> index 3f6710c9c5c9..f0f318e78630 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c
> @@ -411,7 +411,7 @@ set_change_info(struct nfsd4_change_info *cinfo, struct svc_fh *fhp)
> if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!fhp->fh_pre_saved))
> cinfo->before_change = 0;
> if (!fhp->fh_post_saved)
> - cinfo->after_change = 0;
> + cinfo->after_change = cinfo->before_change + 1;
> }
>
> static __be32
>
> ---
> base-commit: 97a5d0146ef443df148805a4e9c3c44111f14ab1
> change-id: 20230724-bz2223560-5ed6bc3a5db7
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
>

--
Chuck Lever