[DLM] fix user unlocking

When a user process exits, we clear all the locks it holds.  There is a
problem, though, with locks that the process had begun unlocking before it
exited.  We couldn't find the lkb's that were in the process of being
unlocked remotely, to flag that they are DEAD.  To solve this, we move
lkb's being unlocked onto a new list in the per-process structure that
tracks what locks the process is holding.  We can then go through this
list to flag the necessary lkb's when clearing locks for a process when it
exits.

Signed-off-by: David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>

1 files changed, 9 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/fs/dlm/user.c b/fs/dlm/user.c
index c37e93e4f2df..d378b7fe2a1e 100644
--- a/fs/dlm/user.c
+++ b/fs/dlm/user.c
@@ -180,6 +180,14 @@ void dlm_user_add_ast(struct dlm_lkb *lkb, int type)
 	    ua->lksb.sb_status == -EAGAIN && !list_empty(&lkb->lkb_ownqueue))
 		remove_ownqueue = 1;
 
+	/* unlocks or cancels of waiting requests need to be removed from the
+	   proc's unlocking list, again there must be a better way...  */
+
+	if (ua->lksb.sb_status == -DLM_EUNLOCK ||
+	    (ua->lksb.sb_status == -DLM_ECANCEL &&
+	     lkb->lkb_grmode == DLM_LOCK_IV))
+		remove_ownqueue = 1;
+
 	/* We want to copy the lvb to userspace when the completion
 	   ast is read if the status is 0, the lock has an lvb and
 	   lvb_ops says we should.  We could probably have set_lvb_lock()
@@ -523,6 +531,7 @@ static int device_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
 	proc->lockspace = ls->ls_local_handle;
 	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&proc->asts);
 	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&proc->locks);
+	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&proc->unlocking);
 	spin_lock_init(&proc->asts_spin);
 	spin_lock_init(&proc->locks_spin);
 	init_waitqueue_head(&proc->wait);