SVCAUTH reap the rsc cache entry on RPC_SS_PROC_DESTROY
Subsystems (3)
PATCH 1/1 SVCAUTH reap the rsc cache entry on RPC_SS_PROC_DESTROY
From: Andy Adamson <[email protected]>
Version 4 of this patch set uses the patch provided by Neil Brown that directly unhashes and put's the to be deleted cache entry.
I took the liberty of providing the patch comments.
Neil - of course, do what you want with the patch and comments.
Thanks!
-->Andy
Neil Brown (1):
SVCAUTH reap the rsc cache entry on RPC_SS_PROC_DESTROY
include/linux/sunrpc/cache.h | 1 + net/sunrpc/auth_gss/svcauth_gss.c | 4 ++-- net/sunrpc/cache.c | 13 +++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Signature · 1 line
1.8.3.1
PATCH 1/1 SVCAUTH reap the rsc cache entry on RPC_SS_PROC_DESTROY
From: Neil Brown <[email protected]>
The rsc cache code operates in a read_lock/write_lock environment. Changes to a cache entry should use the provided rsc_update routine which takes the write_lock.
The current code sets the expiry_time and the CACHE_NEGATIVE flag without taking the write_lock as it does not call rsc_update. Without this patch, while cache_clean sees the entries to be removed, it does not remove the rsc_entries. This is because rsc_update updates other fields such as flush_time and last_refresh in the entry to trigger cache_clean to reap the entry.
Add a new sunrpc_cache_unhash() function (by Neil Brown) designed to directly unhash and reap the to be destroyed cache entry.
--- include/linux/sunrpc/cache.h | 1 + net/sunrpc/auth_gss/svcauth_gss.c | 4 ++-- net/sunrpc/cache.c | 13 +++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
include/linux/sunrpc/cache.h +1 -0
@@ -227,6 +227,7 @@ extern int cache_check(struct cache_detail *detail,extern int sunrpc_cache_register_pipefs (struct dentry *parent,const char *,umode_t ,struct cache_detail *);extern void sunrpc_cache_unregister_pipefs (struct cache_detail *); +extern void sunrpc_cache_unhash (struct cache_detail *,struct cache_head *);/* Must store cache_detail in seq_file->private if using next three functions */ extern void *cache_seq_start (struct seq_file *file,loff_t *pos);
net/sunrpc/auth_gss/svcauth_gss.c +2 -2
@@ -1489,8 +1489,8 @@ static void destroy_use_gss_proxy_proc_entry(struct net *net) {}case RPC_GSS_PROC_DESTROY :if (gss_write_verf (rqstp, rsci->mechctx, gc->gc_seq)) goto auth_err; - rsci->h.expiry_time =get_seconds (); -set_bit (CACHE_NEGATIVE , &rsci->h.flags); +/* Delete the entry from the cache_list and call cache_put */ +sunrpc_cache_unhash (sn->rsc_cache, &rsci->h);if (resv->iov_len +4 >PAGE_SIZE ) goto drop;svc_putnl (resv,RPC_SUCCESS );
net/sunrpc/cache.c +13 -0
@@ -1855,3 +1855,16 @@ void sunrpc_cache_unregister_pipefs(struct cache_detail *cd) }EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL (sunrpc_cache_unregister_pipefs); +void sunrpc_cache_unhash (struct cache_detail *cd,struct cache_head *h) +{ +write_lock (&cd->hash_lock); +if (!hlist_unhashed (&h->cache_list)){ +hlist_del_init (&h->cache_list); + cd->entries--; +write_unlock (&cd->hash_lock); +cache_put (h, cd); + }else +write_unlock (&cd->hash_lock); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL (sunrpc_cache_unhash); +
Signature · 1 line
1.8.3.1
I'm not against the patch, but I'm still not convinced by the explanation:
Quoted 5 lines · On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 12:38:06PM -0500, [email protected] wrote:
From: Neil Brown <[email protected]>
The rsc cache code operates in a read_lock/write_lock environment. Changes to a cache entry should use the provided
rsc_updateroutine which takes thewrite_lock.
It looks pretty suspicious to be setting CACHE_NEGATIVE without the cache_lock for write, but I'm not actually convinced there's a bug there either. In any case not one that you'd be hitting reliably.
Quoted 6 lines
The current code sets the
expiry_timeand theCACHE_NEGATIVEflag without taking thewrite_lockas it does not callrsc_update. Without this patch, whilecache_cleansees the entries to be removed, it does not remove thersc_entries. This is becausersc_updateupdates other fields such asflush_timeandlast_refreshin the entry to triggercache_cleanto reap the entry.
I think the root cause of the particular behavior you were seeing was actually an oversight from Neil's c5b29f885afe "sunrpc: use seconds since boot in expiry cache", which missed this one occurrence of get_seconds(). So it's setting the item's entry to something decades in the future.
And that's probably not been a huge deal since these entries aren't so big, and they will eventually get cleaned up by cache_purge when the cache is destroyed. Still, I can imagine it slowing down cache lookups on a long-lived server.
The one-liner:
- rsci->h.expiry_time = get_seconds();
+ rsci->h.expiry_time = seconds_since_boot();
would probably also do the job. Am I missing something?
But, OK, I think Neil's patch will ensure entries get cleaned up more quickly than that would, and might also fix a rare race.
--b.
Quoted 63 lines
Add a new
sunrpc_cache_unhash()function (by Neil Brown) designed to directly unhash and reap the to be destroyed cache entry.Signed-off-by Neil Brown <[email protected]>Reported-by Andy Adamson <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Andy Adamson <[email protected]>--- include/linux/sunrpc/cache.h | 1 + net/sunrpc/auth_gss/svcauth_gss.c | 4 ++-- net/sunrpc/cache.c | 13 +++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)include/linux/sunrpc/cache.h +1
-0@@ -227,6 +227,7 @@ extern int cache_check(struct cache_detail *detail,extern int sunrpc_cache_register_pipefs (struct dentry *parent,const char *,umode_t ,struct cache_detail *);extern void sunrpc_cache_unregister_pipefs (struct cache_detail *); +extern void sunrpc_cache_unhash (struct cache_detail *,struct cache_head *);/* Must store cache_detail in seq_file->private if using next three functions */ extern void *cache_seq_start (struct seq_file *file,loff_t *pos);net/sunrpc/auth_gss/svcauth_gss.c +2
-2@@ -1489,8 +1489,8 @@ static void destroy_use_gss_proxy_proc_entry(struct net *net) {}case RPC_GSS_PROC_DESTROY :if (gss_write_verf (rqstp, rsci->mechctx, gc->gc_seq)) goto auth_err; - rsci->h.expiry_time =get_seconds (); -set_bit (CACHE_NEGATIVE , &rsci->h.flags); +/* Delete the entry from the cache_list and call cache_put */ +sunrpc_cache_unhash (sn->rsc_cache, &rsci->h);if (resv->iov_len +4 >PAGE_SIZE ) goto drop;svc_putnl (resv,RPC_SUCCESS );net/sunrpc/cache.c +13
-0@@ -1855,3 +1855,16 @@ void sunrpc_cache_unregister_pipefs(struct cache_detail *cd) }EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL (sunrpc_cache_unregister_pipefs); +void sunrpc_cache_unhash (struct cache_detail *cd,struct cache_head *h) +{ +write_lock (&cd->hash_lock); +if (!hlist_unhashed (&h->cache_list)){ +hlist_del_init (&h->cache_list); + cd->entries--; +write_unlock (&cd->hash_lock); +cache_put (h, cd); + }else +write_unlock (&cd->hash_lock); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL (sunrpc_cache_unhash); +Signature · 1 line
1.8.3.1
Quoted 32 lines · J. Bruce Fields
I'm not against the patch, but I'm still not convinced by the explanation:
Quoted 5 lines · On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 12:38:06PM -0500, [email protected] wrote:
From: Neil Brown <[email protected]>
The rsc cache code operates in a read_lock/write_lock environment. Changes to a cache entry should use the provided
rsc_updateroutine which takes thewrite_lock.It looks pretty suspicious to be setting
CACHE_NEGATIVEwithout thecache_lockfor write, but I'm not actually convinced there's a bug there either. In any case not one that you'd be hitting reliably.Quoted 6 lines
The current code sets the
expiry_timeand theCACHE_NEGATIVEflag without taking thewrite_lockas it does not callrsc_update. Without this patch, whilecache_cleansees the entries to be removed, it does not remove thersc_entries. This is becausersc_updateupdates other fields such asflush_timeandlast_refreshin the entry to triggercache_cleanto reap the entry.I think the root cause of the particular behavior you were seeing was actually an oversight from Neil's
c5b29f885afe"sunrpc: use seconds since boot in expiry cache", which missed this one occurrence ofget_seconds(). So it's setting the item's entry to something decades in the future.And that's probably not been a huge deal since these entries aren't so big, and they will eventually get cleaned up by
cache_purgewhen the cache is destroyed. Still, I can imagine it slowing down cache lookups on a long-lived server.
Quoted 6 lines
The one-liner:
-
rsci->h.expiry_time=get_seconds();
+rsci->h.expiry_time=seconds_since_boot();would probably also do the job. Am I missing something?
I was missing that get_seconds() bug - thanks.
The other real bug is that setting h.expiry_time backwards should really set cd->nextcheck backwards too. I thought I had found code which did that, but I think I was confusing ->nextcheck with ->flush_time.
Quoted 3 lines
But, OK, I think Neil's patch will ensure entries get cleaned up more quickly than that would, and might also fix a rare race.
Yes. The patch doesn't just fix the bug, whatever it is. It provides a proper interface for functionality that wasn't previously supported, and so had been hacked into place.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
Quoted 47 lines · NeilBrown
Quoted 32 lines · J. Bruce Fields
I'm not against the patch, but I'm still not convinced by the explanation:
Quoted 5 lines · On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 12:38:06PM -0500, [email protected] wrote:
From: Neil Brown <[email protected]>
The rsc cache code operates in a read_lock/write_lock environment. Changes to a cache entry should use the provided
rsc_updateroutine which takes thewrite_lock.It looks pretty suspicious to be setting
CACHE_NEGATIVEwithout thecache_lockfor write, but I'm not actually convinced there's a bug there either. In any case not one that you'd be hitting reliably.Quoted 6 lines
The current code sets the
expiry_timeand theCACHE_NEGATIVEflag without taking thewrite_lockas it does not callrsc_update. Without this patch, whilecache_cleansees the entries to be removed, it does not remove thersc_entries. This is becausersc_updateupdates other fields such asflush_timeandlast_refreshin the entry to triggercache_cleanto reap the entry.I think the root cause of the particular behavior you were seeing was actually an oversight from Neil's
c5b29f885afe"sunrpc: use seconds since boot in expiry cache", which missed this one occurrence ofget_seconds(). So it's setting the item's entry to something decades in the future.And that's probably not been a huge deal since these entries aren't so big, and they will eventually get cleaned up by
cache_purgewhen the cache is destroyed. Still, I can imagine it slowing down cache lookups on a long-lived server.Quoted 6 lines
The one-liner:
-
rsci->h.expiry_time=get_seconds();
+rsci->h.expiry_time=seconds_since_boot();would probably also do the job. Am I missing something?
I was missing that
get_seconds()bug - thanks.
The other real bug is that setting h.expiry_time backwards should really setcd->nextcheckbackwards too. I thought I had found code which did that, but I think I was confusing ->nextcheck with ->flush_time.Quoted 1 line
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines
But, OK, I think Neil's patch will ensure entries get cleaned up more quickly than that would, and might also fix a rare race.
Yes. The patch doesn't just fix the bug, whatever it is. It provides a proper interface for functionality that wasn't previously supported, and so had been hacked into place.
Got it. So, with another changelog rewrite, I'm applying it like the below.
Another question is whether it's worth a stable cc.... I think so, as all it would take is a case where a server gets a lot of PROC_DESTROYs over its lifetime. That's not hard to imagine. And the symptoms are probably non-obvious and cured by a reboot, which might explain it not having seen bug reports.
--b.
commit 27297f41527d
Author: Neil Brown <[email protected]> Date: Thu Dec 22 12:38:06 2016 -0500
svcauth_gss: free context promptly on PROC_DESTROY
Since c5b29f885afe "sunrpc: use seconds since boot in expiry cache", the expiry_time field has been in units of seconds since boot, but that patch overlooked the server code that handles RPC_GSS_PROC_DESTROY requests. The result is that when we get a request from a client to destroy a context, we set that context's expiry time to a time decades in the future.
The context will still be cleaned up by cache_purge when the module is unloaded or the container shut down, but a lot of contexts could pile up before then.
The simple fix would be just to set expiry_time to seconds_since_boot(), but modifying the entry outside the cache_lock is also looks dubious (though I'm not completely sure what the race would be). So let's provide a helper that does this properly, taking the lock and removing the entry immediately.
include/linux/sunrpc/cache.h +1 -0
@@ -227,6 +227,7 @@ extern void sunrpc_destroy_cache_detail(struct cache_detail *cd);extern int sunrpc_cache_register_pipefs (struct dentry *parent,const char *,umode_t ,struct cache_detail *);extern void sunrpc_cache_unregister_pipefs (struct cache_detail *); +extern void sunrpc_cache_unhash (struct cache_detail *,struct cache_head *);/* Must store cache_detail in seq_file->private if using next three functions */ extern void *cache_seq_start (struct seq_file *file,loff_t *pos);
net/sunrpc/auth_gss/svcauth_gss.c +2 -2
@@ -1489,8 +1489,8 @@ svcauth_gss_accept(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, __be32 *authp)case RPC_GSS_PROC_DESTROY :if (gss_write_verf (rqstp, rsci->mechctx, gc->gc_seq)) goto auth_err; - rsci->h.expiry_time =get_seconds (); -set_bit (CACHE_NEGATIVE , &rsci->h.flags); +/* Delete the entry from the cache_list and call cache_put */ +sunrpc_cache_unhash (sn->rsc_cache, &rsci->h);if (resv->iov_len +4 >PAGE_SIZE ) goto drop;svc_putnl (resv,RPC_SUCCESS );
net/sunrpc/cache.c +12 -0
@@ -1855,3 +1855,15 @@ void sunrpc_cache_unregister_pipefs(struct cache_detail *cd) }EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL (sunrpc_cache_unregister_pipefs); +void sunrpc_cache_unhash (struct cache_detail *cd,struct cache_head *h) +{ +write_lock (&cd->hash_lock); +if (!hlist_unhashed (&h->cache_list)){ +hlist_del_init (&h->cache_list); + cd->entries--; +write_unlock (&cd->hash_lock); +cache_put (h, cd); + }else +write_unlock (&cd->hash_lock); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL (sunrpc_cache_unhash);
Quoted 55 lines · J. Bruce Fields
Quoted 47 lines · NeilBrown
Quoted 32 lines · J. Bruce Fields
I'm not against the patch, but I'm still not convinced by the explanation:
Quoted 5 lines · On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 12:38:06PM -0500, [email protected] wrote:
From: Neil Brown <[email protected]>
The rsc cache code operates in a read_lock/write_lock environment. Changes to a cache entry should use the provided
rsc_updateroutine which takes thewrite_lock.It looks pretty suspicious to be setting
CACHE_NEGATIVEwithout thecache_lockfor write, but I'm not actually convinced there's a bug there either. In any case not one that you'd be hitting reliably.Quoted 6 lines
The current code sets the
expiry_timeand theCACHE_NEGATIVEflag without taking thewrite_lockas it does not callrsc_update. Without this patch, whilecache_cleansees the entries to be removed, it does not remove thersc_entries. This is becausersc_updateupdates other fields such asflush_timeandlast_refreshin the entry to triggercache_cleanto reap the entry.I think the root cause of the particular behavior you were seeing was actually an oversight from Neil's
c5b29f885afe"sunrpc: use seconds since boot in expiry cache", which missed this one occurrence ofget_seconds(). So it's setting the item's entry to something decades in the future.And that's probably not been a huge deal since these entries aren't so big, and they will eventually get cleaned up by
cache_purgewhen the cache is destroyed. Still, I can imagine it slowing down cache lookups on a long-lived server.Quoted 6 lines
The one-liner:
-
rsci->h.expiry_time=get_seconds();
+rsci->h.expiry_time=seconds_since_boot();would probably also do the job. Am I missing something?
I was missing that
get_seconds()bug - thanks.
The other real bug is that setting h.expiry_time backwards should really setcd->nextcheckbackwards too. I thought I had found code which did that, but I think I was confusing ->nextcheck with ->flush_time.Quoted 1 line
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines
But, OK, I think Neil's patch will ensure entries get cleaned up more quickly than that would, and might also fix a rare race.
Yes. The patch doesn't just fix the bug, whatever it is. It provides a proper interface for functionality that wasn't previously supported, and so had been hacked into place.
Quoted 8 lines
Got it. So, with another changelog rewrite, I'm applying it like the below.
Another question is whether it's worth a stable cc.... I think so, as all it would take is a case where a server gets a lot of
PROC_DESTROYsover its lifetime. That's not hard to imagine. And the symptoms are probably non-obvious and cured by a reboot, which might explain it not having seen bug reports.
How about applying
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
-
rsci->h.expiry_time=get_seconds();
+rsci->h.expiry_time=seconds_since_boot();
first with a Cc: to stable (and a Fixes:), then this patch on top of that without the Cc.
With the code as it is, destroyed entries won't expire for years. With the above change, they will expire within half an hour, as cache_clean() looks at every cache at least every 30 minutes.
If we also added code to reduce ->nextcheck (which would require a write lock), then they would expired within 30 seconds, as do_cache_clean() runs cache_clean() at least ever 30 seconds (I wonder if we should make it more demand-driven?).
With the full patch, it is removed instantly.
I think a 30 minutes guarantee is enough for -stable, especially as it is achieved with such a tiny, obviously correct, patch.
Quoted 20 lines
--b.
commit
27297f41527dAuthor: Neil Brown <[email protected]> Date: Thu Dec 22 12:38:06 2016 -0500
svcauth_gss: free context promptly onPROC_DESTROYSince
c5b29f885afe"sunrpc: use seconds since boot in expiry cache", theexpiry_timefield has been in units of seconds since boot, but that patch overlooked the server code that handlesRPC_GSS_PROC_DESTROYrequests. The result is that when we get a request from a client to destroy a context, we set that context's expiry time to a time decades in the future.The context will still be cleaned up by
cache_purgewhen the module is unloaded or the container shut down, but a lot of contexts could pile up before then.
Quoted 5 lines
The simple fix would be just to set
expiry_timetoseconds_since_boot(), but modifying the entry outside thecache_lockis also looks dubious (though I'm not completely sure what the race would be). So let's provide a helper that does this properly, taking the lock and removing the entry immediately.
I don't think the locking is an issue at all.
Setting h.expiry_time backwards without also setting cd->next_check backwards results in internal inconsistencies, so is wrong for that reason.
Setting CACHE_NEGATIVE is not "obviously correct" as, in general, value fields are only allocateed when CACHE_NEGATIVE is not set, so they might not be freed when it is. The doesn't actually apply to this cache, so it would work but is not consistent with the intended (undocumented) interface usage.
Up to you how much of this you spell out. I don't object to your changelog above if you want to stay with it.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
Quoted 53 lines
Signed-off-by Neil Brown <[email protected]>Reported-by Andy Adamson <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Andy Adamson <[email protected]>Signed-off-by J. Bruce Fields <[email protected]>include/linux/sunrpc/cache.h +1
-0@@ -227,6 +227,7 @@ extern void sunrpc_destroy_cache_detail(struct cache_detail *cd);extern int sunrpc_cache_register_pipefs (struct dentry *parent,const char *,umode_t ,struct cache_detail *);extern void sunrpc_cache_unregister_pipefs (struct cache_detail *); +extern void sunrpc_cache_unhash (struct cache_detail *,struct cache_head *);/* Must store cache_detail in seq_file->private if using next three functions */ extern void *cache_seq_start (struct seq_file *file,loff_t *pos);net/sunrpc/auth_gss/svcauth_gss.c +2
-2@@ -1489,8 +1489,8 @@ svcauth_gss_accept(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, __be32 *authp)case RPC_GSS_PROC_DESTROY :if (gss_write_verf (rqstp, rsci->mechctx, gc->gc_seq)) goto auth_err; - rsci->h.expiry_time =get_seconds (); -set_bit (CACHE_NEGATIVE , &rsci->h.flags); +/* Delete the entry from the cache_list and call cache_put */ +sunrpc_cache_unhash (sn->rsc_cache, &rsci->h);if (resv->iov_len +4 >PAGE_SIZE ) goto drop;svc_putnl (resv,RPC_SUCCESS );net/sunrpc/cache.c +12
-0@@ -1855,3 +1855,15 @@ void sunrpc_cache_unregister_pipefs(struct cache_detail *cd) }EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL (sunrpc_cache_unregister_pipefs); +void sunrpc_cache_unhash (struct cache_detail *cd,struct cache_head *h) +{ +write_lock (&cd->hash_lock); +if (!hlist_unhashed (&h->cache_list)){ +hlist_del_init (&h->cache_list); + cd->entries--; +write_unlock (&cd->hash_lock); +cache_put (h, cd); + }else +write_unlock (&cd->hash_lock); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL (sunrpc_cache_unhash);
Quoted 6 lines · NeilBrown
How about applying
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
-
rsci->h.expiry_time=get_seconds();
+rsci->h.expiry_time=seconds_since_boot();first with a Cc: to stable (and a Fixes:), then this patch on top of that without the Cc.
Oh, good idea, thanks. Results below.
commit 78794d189070
Author: J. Bruce Fields <[email protected]> Date: Mon Jan 9 17:15:18 2017 -0500
svcrpc: don't leak contexts on PROC_DESTROY
Context expiry times are in units of seconds since boot, not unix time.
The use of get_seconds() here therefore sets the expiry time decades in the future. This prevents timely freeing of contexts destroyed by client RPC_GSS_PROC_DESTROY requests. We'd still free them eventually (when the module is unloaded or the container shut down), but a lot of contexts could pile up before then.
net/sunrpc/auth_gss/svcauth_gss.c +1 -1
@@ -1489,7 +1489,7 @@ svcauth_gss_accept(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, __be32 *authp)case RPC_GSS_PROC_DESTROY :if (gss_write_verf (rqstp, rsci->mechctx, gc->gc_seq)) goto auth_err; - rsci->h.expiry_time =get_seconds (); + rsci->h.expiry_time =seconds_since_boot ();set_bit (CACHE_NEGATIVE , &rsci->h.flags);if (resv->iov_len +4 >PAGE_SIZE ) goto drop;
commit 987a7601aa80
Author: Neil Brown <[email protected]> Date: Thu Dec 22 12:38:06 2016 -0500
svcrpc: free contexts immediately on PROC_DESTROY
We currently handle a client PROC_DESTROY request by turning it CACHE_NEGATIVE, setting the expired time to now, and then waiting for cache_clean to clean it up later. Since we forgot to set the cache's nextcheck value, that could take up to 30 minutes. Also, though there's probably no real bug in this case, setting CACHE_NEGATIVE directly like this probably isn't a great idea in general.
So let's just remove the entry from the cache directly, and move this bit of cache manipulation to a helper function.
include/linux/sunrpc/cache.h +1 -0
@@ -227,6 +227,7 @@ extern void sunrpc_destroy_cache_detail(struct cache_detail *cd);extern int sunrpc_cache_register_pipefs (struct dentry *parent,const char *,umode_t ,struct cache_detail *);extern void sunrpc_cache_unregister_pipefs (struct cache_detail *); +extern void sunrpc_cache_unhash (struct cache_detail *,struct cache_head *);/* Must store cache_detail in seq_file->private if using next three functions */ extern void *cache_seq_start (struct seq_file *file,loff_t *pos);
net/sunrpc/auth_gss/svcauth_gss.c +2 -2
@@ -1489,8 +1489,8 @@ svcauth_gss_accept(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, __be32 *authp)case RPC_GSS_PROC_DESTROY :if (gss_write_verf (rqstp, rsci->mechctx, gc->gc_seq)) goto auth_err; - rsci->h.expiry_time =seconds_since_boot (); -set_bit (CACHE_NEGATIVE , &rsci->h.flags); +/* Delete the entry from the cache_list and call cache_put */ +sunrpc_cache_unhash (sn->rsc_cache, &rsci->h);if (resv->iov_len +4 >PAGE_SIZE ) goto drop;svc_putnl (resv,RPC_SUCCESS );
net/sunrpc/cache.c +12 -0
@@ -1855,3 +1855,15 @@ void sunrpc_cache_unregister_pipefs(struct cache_detail *cd) }EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL (sunrpc_cache_unregister_pipefs); +void sunrpc_cache_unhash (struct cache_detail *cd,struct cache_head *h) +{ +write_lock (&cd->hash_lock); +if (!hlist_unhashed (&h->cache_list)){ +hlist_del_init (&h->cache_list); + cd->entries--; +write_unlock (&cd->hash_lock); +cache_put (h, cd); + }else +write_unlock (&cd->hash_lock); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL (sunrpc_cache_unhash);
Quoted 9 lines · J. Bruce Fields
Quoted 6 lines · NeilBrown
How about applying
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
-
rsci->h.expiry_time=get_seconds();
+rsci->h.expiry_time=seconds_since_boot();first with a Cc: to stable (and a Fixes:), then this patch on top of that without the Cc.
Oh, good idea, thanks. Results below.
Ferpect. Thanks!
NeilBrown
Quoted 9 lines · On Fri, Dec 23 2016, [email protected] wrote:
From: Andy Adamson <[email protected]>
Version 4 of this patch set uses the patch provided by Neil Brown that directly unhashes and put's the to be deleted cache entry.
I took the liberty of providing the patch comments.
Neil - of course, do what you want with the patch and comments.
I'm happy with the patch and comments as they stand. Thanks for pursuing this!
Thanks,
NeilBrown