@@ -1377,7 +1377,7 @@ cifs_parse_mount_options(char *options, const char *devname,
}
static struct TCP_Server_Info *
-cifs_find_tcp_session(struct sockaddr_storage *addr)
+cifs_find_tcp_session(struct sockaddr_storage *addr, unsigned short int port)
{
struct list_head *tmp;
struct TCP_Server_Info *server;
@@ -1397,16 +1397,41 @@ cifs_find_tcp_session(struct sockaddr_storage *addr)
if (server->tcpStatus == CifsNew)
continue;
- if (addr->ss_family == AF_INET &&
- (addr4->sin_addr.s_addr !=
- server->addr.sockAddr.sin_addr.s_addr))
- continue;
- else if (addr->ss_family == AF_INET6 &&
- (!ipv6_addr_equal(&server->addr.sockAddr6.sin6_addr,
- &addr6->sin6_addr) ||
- server->addr.sockAddr6.sin6_scope_id !=
- addr6->sin6_scope_id))
- continue;
+ switch (addr->ss_family) {
+ case AF_INET:
+ /* user overrode default port? */
+ if (port) {
+ addr4->sin_port = htons(port);
+ if (addr4->sin_addr.s_addr !=
+ server->addr.sockAddr.sin_addr.s_addr ||
+ addr4->sin_port !=
+ server->addr.sockAddr.sin_port)
+ continue;
+ } else {
+ if (addr4->sin_addr.s_addr !=
+ server->addr.sockAddr.sin_addr.s_addr)
+ continue;
+ }
+
+ case AF_INET6:
+ /* user overrode default port? */
+ if (port) {
+ addr6->sin6_port = htons(port);
+ if (!ipv6_addr_equal(&server->addr.sockAddr6.sin6_addr,
+ &addr6->sin6_addr) ||
+ server->addr.sockAddr6.sin6_scope_id !=
+ addr6->sin6_scope_id ||
+ server->addr.sockAddr6.sin6_port !=
+ addr6->sin6_port)
+ continue;
+ } else {
+ if (!ipv6_addr_equal(&server->addr.sockAddr6.sin6_addr,
+ &addr6->sin6_addr) ||
+ server->addr.sockAddr6.sin6_scope_id !=
+ addr6->sin6_scope_id)
+ continue;
+ }
+ }
++server->srv_count;
write_unlock(&cifs_tcp_ses_lock);
@@ -1475,7 +1500,7 @@ cifs_get_tcp_session(struct smb_vol *volume_info)
}
/* see if we already have a matching tcp_ses */
- tcp_ses = cifs_find_tcp_session(&addr);
+ tcp_ses = cifs_find_tcp_session(&addr, volume_info->port);
if (tcp_ses)
return tcp_ses;
It seems there is a regression that got introduced while Jeff fixed all the mount/umount races. While attempting to find whether a tcp session is already existing, we were not checking whether the "port" used are the same. When a second mount is attempted with a different "port=" option, it is being ignored. Because of this the cifs mounts that uses a SSH tunnel appears to be broken. Steps to reproduce: 1. create 2 shares # SSH Tunnel a SMB session 2. ssh -f -L 6111:127.0.0.1:445 root@localhost "sleep 86400" 3. ssh -f -L 6222:127.0.0.1:445 root@localhost "sleep 86400" 4. tcpdump -i lo 6111 & 5. mkdir -p /mnt/mnt1 6. mkdir -p /mnt/mnt2 7. mount.cifs //localhost/a /mnt/mnt1 -o username=guest,ip=127.0.0.1,port=6111 #(shows tcpdump activity on port 6111) 8. mount.cifs //localhost/b /mnt/mnt2 -o username=guest,ip=127.0.0.1,port=6222 #(shows tcpdump activity only on port 6111 and not on 6222 Fix by adding a check to compare the port _only_ if the user tries to override the tcp port with "port=" option, before deciding that an existing tcp session is found. Also, clean up a bit by replacing if-else if by a switch statment while at it as suggested by Jeff. Signed-off-by: Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@suse.de> --- fs/cifs/connect.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ 1 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)