[LU-3484] Incorrect identification of anonymous dentry as root under SLES11SP2

• Status: Resolved
• Project: Lustre
• Affects Version/s: Lustre 2.4.0
• Fix Version/s: Lustre 2.5.0
• Type: Bug
• Priority: Critical
• Reporter: Patrick Farrell (Inactive)
• Assignee: Bob Glossman (Inactive)
• Resolution: Fixed
• Labels: mn4, patch
• Severity: 3

Description

When attempting to export Lustre 2.4 via NFS with SLES11SP2, we ran in to an issue (See LU-3483 as well for another) where Lustre identifies anonymous dentries as root dentries and bugs when calling ll_invalidate_aliases.

Here's the code in question (from ll_invalidate_aliases in lustre/llite/dcache.c):

if (dentry->d_name.len == 1 && dentry->d_name.name[0] == '/') {
                        CERROR("called on root (?) dentry=%p, inode=%p "
                               "ino=%lu\n", dentry, inode, inode->i_ino);
                        lustre_dump_dentry(dentry, 1);
                        libcfs_debug_dumpstack(NULL);
                }

The problem is a change in d_obtain_alias that's been made in SLES11SP2. Here's where anonymous dentries are named, this is from d_obtain_alias in CentOS6.4 or SLES11SP1:

        static const struct qstr anonstring = { .name = "" };
        :
        :
        tmp = d_alloc(NULL, &anonstring);

In SLES11SP2, it's this:

        static const struct qstr anonstring = { .name = "/", .len = 1 };

        tmp = d_alloc(NULL, &anonstring);

As you can see, that looks like a root dentry to the check being done by Lustre. There's a comment just above saying this was the intention:

 * This alias can sometimes be seen by prepend_path, so make it look
 * the same as a d_alloc_root alias.
 */

[The commit is recorded here: http://kernel.opensuse.org/cgit/kernel-source/commit/?id=f9a956fc1dc4b5271662736b5016324d43b1b99f
and appears to be SLES specific.]

Ideally, Lustre would find another way to identify the root dentry here. I have simply commented out this check while doing further testing, but I'd like to understand:
Is there a reason Lustre can't use the same method to see if a dentry is root as the kernel does?
IE:

#define IS_ROOT(x) ((x) == (x)->d_parent)

If so, I'd suggest that.

Comments

[Patrick Farrell (Inactive)]

Looks like there's a problem with that idea - Anonymous dentries are their own parents, just like root dentries. From d_obtain_alias again:
tmp->d_parent = tmp; /* make sure dput doesn't croak */

If no other alias is found, tmp is returned with the parent set as above.

Suggestions?

[Andreas Dilger]

I think in modern kernels there is a flag in the dentry DCACHE_DISCONNECTED, that can be used instead of checking the name.

[Patrick Farrell (Inactive)]

Andreas,

There is such a flag, here's what the header file has to say in SLES11SP2:
—
#define DCACHE_DISCONNECTED 0x0004
/* This dentry is possibly not currently connected to the dcache tree, in

• which case its parent will either be itself, or will have this flag as
• well. nfsd will not use a dentry with this bit set, but will first
• endeavour to clear the bit either by discovering that it is connected,
• or by performing lookup operations. Any filesystem which supports
• nfsd_operations MUST have a lookup function which, if it finds a
• directory inode with a DCACHE_DISCONNECTED dentry, will d_move that
• dentry into place and return that dentry rather than the passed one,
• typically using d_splice_alias. */
  —

However, it's set on anonymous dentries (from d_obtain_alias):
—
/* attach a disconnected dentry */
spin_lock(&tmp->d_lock);
tmp->d_sb = inode->i_sb;
d_set_d_op(tmp, tmp->d_sb->s_d_op);
tmp->d_inode = inode;
-> tmp>d_flags |= DCACHE_DISCONNECTED;
list_add(&tmp->d_alias, &inode->i_dentry);
hlist_bl_lock(&tmp->d_sb->s_anon);
hlist_bl_add_head(&tmp->d_hash, &tmp->d_sb->s_anon);
hlist_bl_unlock(&tmp->d_sb->s_anon);
spin_unlock(&tmp->d_lock);
spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
security_d_instantiate(tmp, inode);

return tmp;
—

According to what I'm reading here, it can be unset later, but I don't know when that would be:
http://www.mjmwired.net/kernel/Documentation/filesystems/Exporting

I'll do a bit more reading.

[Patrick Farrell (Inactive)]

Couldn't we compare the value of the dentry pointer to the value of the root dentry as given in the super block?

IE:
if(dentry == dentry->d_sb->s_root)
As a replacement for the name check.

Is there a reason that might be unsafe or incorrect in some cases?

[Andreas Dilger]

It looks like comparing against d_sb->s_root should be correct.

[Patrick Farrell (Inactive)]

Patch is up:
http://review.whamcloud.com/6726

[Peter Jones]

Thanks Patrick!

Bob

Could you please take care of this patch?

Thanks

Peter

[Patrick Farrell (Inactive)]

Quick note on this:
Contrary to what I said above, the dentry name change has landed in the upstream Linux kernel, by at least 3.7.

[Bob Glossman (Inactive)]

fix landed before 2.4.52 tag. closing.