[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: NFS regression in 2.6
On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 10:37:50PM -0700, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> >>>>> " " == Ulrich Drepper <> 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?


[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
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:47    [W:0.294 / U:0.288 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site