Re: update for 2.1.65 knfsd

Bill Hawes (whawes@star.net)
Wed, 19 Nov 1997 09:03:28 -0500

H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > With these changes in place, it should be very rare (I'm tempted to say
> > impossible :-)) to get a stale filehandle error except in the cases
> > where a traditional nfs server would do so. Moving a file to a different
> > directory or deleting it should result in a stale filehandle, but this
> > is the correct behavior (I think).
> >
>
> Is it? Or do you mean deleting or moving it locally? I suspect even
> the latter (moving) case probably should access the file...
>
> I might try to write a test case for this one and test it out...

Hi Peter,
The current NFS client goes to some length to ensure that dentries
aren't busy before a rename, so that new filehandles will be obtained
after the operation. Thus the client shouldn't ever see a stale
filehandle message following the rename.

My comment about needing a new filehandle after a cross-directory rename
was based on comments in the NFS client code, which implied that NFS
servers generally supplied a different filehandle in such cases.

Regards,
Bill