Re: NFS Bug in 2.6.23 ? SOLUTION ?

[Gianluca Alberici]

Trond Myklebust wrote:

> On Sun, 2007-11-18 at 19:44 +0100, Gianluca Alberici wrote:
>  
>
> > Trond,
> >
> > The problem is in nfs_mountpoint_timeout. After this time 
> > dentry_delete(/,4) removes the mountpoint, then it is very difficult to 
> > automount (at least with CFSD), one has got to try 2 or three times 
> > cd'ing into the mount point. Applications wont ever had the chance to 
> > autoremount (ENOTDIR).
> >    
>
> Sounds like CFSD has a bug w.r.t. what fsid it returns to the client.
>
>  
Very likely...and im sure its not the one...unfortunately CFSD has not 
been mantained for a very long time (i think 2001)
but in the end up to 2.6.20 has done its job very well...

> > I have some questions:
> >
> > - nfs_mountpoint_timeout seems to be set in sysctl.c even if nfsv4 is 
> > not. Is this correct ? I've read somewhere that it was introduced for v4.
> >    
>
> Wrong. It applies to all mountpoint crossing. If the server tells us
> that the fsid has changed, then we create a new mountpoint.
>
>  
>
> > - Why this sysctl is not registered in my 2.6.20 kernel where it should 
> > be registered ?
> >    
>
> Prior to 2.6.21-rc5, we had a bug in register_nfs_fs() whereby it failed
> to register the sysctl table unless you enabled NFSv4.
>
>  
>
> > - Why this parameter has not a 'disabled' value (i mean kind of -1) ?
> >    
>
> Why should it? 
For backwards compatilbility ? Couldn't be useful to have the chance to 
make NFS client act
exactly as it always did, at least as an option, to talk to 'ancient NFS 
servers' ?

Or at least have the chance to set this timeout to infinity ?

Many thanks for your time, best regards,

Gianluca

> The current behaviour is quite correct. If you cross a
> mountpoint, then you should remount in order to ensure that the inode
> numbers remain unique per-filesystem.
>  
>
> We know that some ancient NFS servers had problems returning the correct
> fsid in readdirplus replies, so 2.6.22 adds support to disable
> readdirplus calls via a 'nordirplus' mount option. I guess you could try
> that...
>
> Trond
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>  

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/