From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from fieldses.org ([174.143.236.118]:51308 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757223Ab2DIWc0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Apr 2012 18:32:26 -0400 Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2012 18:32:21 -0400 From: Bruce Fields To: Orion Poplawski Cc: "Myklebust, Trond" , "linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [nfsv4] open(O_CREAT) returns EEXISTS on symbolic link created on another system until stat()ed Message-ID: <20120409223221.GD10508@fieldses.org> References: <20120329193100.GA20329@fieldses.org> <1333052170.10318.6.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <1333053750.10318.15.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20120329205035.GB21493@fieldses.org> <1333054622.10318.19.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20120329210838.GC21493@fieldses.org> <20120329211713.GD21493@fieldses.org> <4F7DC9DC.6090802@cora.nwra.com> <20120405165311.GA11707@fieldses.org> <4F7DFDD7.30005@cora.nwra.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <4F7DFDD7.30005@cora.nwra.com> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 02:17:27PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 04/05/2012 10:53 AM, Bruce Fields wrote: > >On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 10:35:40AM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: > >>On 03/29/2012 03:17 PM, Dr James Bruce Fields wrote: > >>>On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 05:08:38PM -0400, Dr James Bruce Fields wrote: > >>>>Anyway, something like the following (untested) should change v3 to > >>>>return nfs_ok in this case, and v4 to return the same errors it would on > >>>>a non-create open. > >>> > >>>Looking at the history, I think the v3 behavior has been there from the > >>>start. I wonder why we've never gotten a bug report? > >>> > >>>Looking at wireshark.... I guess the client always does a lookup first, > >>>so we never hit this case (unless someone replaces the file by a > >>>non-regular-file between a lookup and a create?) > >>> > >>>--b. > >> > >>So, is this all set to eventually make it into the mainline kernel? > >>Or is there still something I can do to help move it along? > > > >If you could confirm whether the patch in > > > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-nfs/msg28840.html > > > >fixes your problem, that would help. > > > >--b. > > I applied it to 2.6.32-220.7.1.el6.x86_64 and it appears to have > fixed the issue. Can't be sure yet if it broke anything else > though... Great, thanks. I'm applying as follows. I want to run in through some basic regression tests and then I'll see about getting it upstream. (Though it's a bug we've apparently lived with since the beginning of time, so it may need to wait for the next merge window.) --b.