Re: NFS regression in 2.6

[Andries Brouwer]

On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 10:37:50PM -0700, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> >>>>> " " == Ulrich Drepper <drepper@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
>      > The result is always, 100% of the time, a failure in ftruncate.
>      > The kernel reports ESTALE.  This has not been a problem in 2.4
>      > and not even in 2.6 until <mumble> months ago.  And of course
>      > it works with local disks.
> 
> There are known bugs in the way we handle readdirplus. That's why it
> only hits NFSv3. Does the following patch fix it?

> +out_zap_parent:
> +	nfs_zap_caches(dir);

I don't think it will. My analysis of yesterday night was:
- no silly rename is done
- this is because d_count equals 1
- this is because we have two different dentries for the same file
- this is caused by the fragment

        /* If we're doing an exclusive create, optimize away the lookup */
        if (nfs_is_exclusive_create(dir, nd))
                return NULL;

in nfs/dir.c.
Do you agree?

Andries


[but I do not understand all details yet]
[may look at it again this evening if you don't tell us what happens]

-
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/