[DLM] don't accept replies to old recovery messages
We often abort a recovery after sending a status request to a remote node.
We want to ignore any potential status reply we get from the remote node.
If we get one of these unwanted replies, we've often moved on to the next
recovery message and incremented the message sequence counter, so the
reply will be ignored due to the seq number. In some cases, we've not
moved on to the next message so the seq number of the reply we want to
ignore is still correct, causing the reply to be accepted. The next
recovery message will then mistake this old reply as a new one.
To fix this, we add the flag RCOM_WAIT to indicate when we can accept a
new reply. We clear this flag if we abort recovery while waiting for a
reply. Before the flag is set again (to allow new replies) we know that
any old replies will be rejected due to their sequence number. We also
initialize the recovery-message sequence number to a random value when a
lockspace is first created. This makes it clear when messages are being
rejected from an old instance of a lockspace that has since been
recreated.
Signed-off-by: David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>
diff --git a/fs/dlm/dlm_internal.h b/fs/dlm/dlm_internal.h
index 1e5cd67..1ee8195 100644
--- a/fs/dlm/dlm_internal.h
+++ b/fs/dlm/dlm_internal.h
@@ -471,6 +471,7 @@
char *ls_recover_buf;
int ls_recover_nodeid; /* for debugging */
uint64_t ls_rcom_seq;
+ spinlock_t ls_rcom_spin;
struct list_head ls_recover_list;
spinlock_t ls_recover_list_lock;
int ls_recover_list_count;
@@ -488,7 +489,8 @@
#define LSFL_RUNNING 1
#define LSFL_RECOVERY_STOP 2
#define LSFL_RCOM_READY 3
-#define LSFL_UEVENT_WAIT 4
+#define LSFL_RCOM_WAIT 4
+#define LSFL_UEVENT_WAIT 5
/* much of this is just saving user space pointers associated with the
lock that we pass back to the user lib with an ast */