Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2008 09:15:09 +1100 From: Antony Mawer <fbsd-fs@mawer.org> To: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, developers@freebsd.org, Yuri Pankov <yuri.pankov@gmail.com>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: reproducible panic with mount_smbfs Message-ID: <490F77ED.9050501@mawer.org> In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10811031320o5d977babpe37bcf22836b8d34@mail.gmail.com> References: <20081102123100.GA1434@darklight.homeunix.org> <3bbf2fe10811020737g211dfb3fs54b48e4071db2393@mail.gmail.com> <3bbf2fe10811020817g1409a38ep26c1ee8edf075201@mail.gmail.com> <200811031458.42549.jhb@freebsd.org> <alpine.BSF.1.10.0811032106110.48320@fledge.watson.org> <3bbf2fe10811031320o5d977babpe37bcf22836b8d34@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Attilio Rao wrote: > 2008/11/3, Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>: >> On Mon, 3 Nov 2008, John Baldwin wrote: >>>> Yuri, could you please test this fix: >> http://www.freebsd.org/~attilio/netsmb.diff >>>> and report if it works? You could get a KASSERT running but this is >> expected as I want to identify on the callers who passes a malformed request >> and fix it. >>> This allows all smb locks to recurse unlike the original code I think. It >> may be better if smb_vclist was initialized with LK_RECURSE, but not all the >> other smb locks. Also, in smb_co_addchild() I think you should just replace >> the existing asserts with appropriate lockmgr_assert() (you could add a >> smb_co_assert() to preserve the layering) rather than removing assertions >> altogether. >> My general feeling is that the locking in netsmb needs a bit of cleanup, >> updating, etc. I'm reluctant to change the underlying primitives (as this >> patch does) without first clarifying what's going on in the code a layer or >> two above. > > I agree with Robert. > We need to make an upper layers analysis and decide what is the best > solution for locks. > This was a quick hack just to let it not panic when mounting. This probably also applies to NWFS and netncp as well -- I haven't had a chance to test NWFS in 7.x as of yet, but will hope to do so in the coming months... --Antony
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?490F77ED.9050501>