Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 19 Nov 2007 08:41:13 +0100 | From | Gianluca Alberici <> | Subject | Re: NFS Bug in 2.6.23 ? SOLUTION ? |
| |
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@vger.kernel.org >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@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |