From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from hr2.samba.org ([144.76.82.148]:43024 "EHLO hr2.samba.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752298AbeEJWMz (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 May 2018 18:12:55 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 15:12:48 -0700 From: Jeremy Allison To: ronnie sahlberg Cc: Steve French , linux-fsdevel , CIFS , Pavel Shilovsky , samba-technical , jra@samba.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] cifs/smb3: directory sync should not return an error Message-ID: <20180510221248.GA203322@jra3> Reply-To: Jeremy Allison References: <20180510184817.GG23039@jra3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 08:08:46AM +1000, ronnie sahlberg wrote: > SMB2 FLUSH ? > > MS-SMB2.pdf is pretty clear that FLUSH can only be used on files or pipes. > If we start using it for directory handles we would need some > clarifications about this use in the spec. Yes. MS-SMB2 is also wrong :-). I have test code that proves FLUSH works against any directory handle opened with FILE_ADD|DIRECTORY_ADD access mask granted. (Steve thought this might be special cased to just the root directory handle on a share, this turns out not to be the case - any directory handle with the required access works OK). > I would wait until MS-SMB2 is updated before we start sending FLUSH on > directory handles. We need to deal with the protocol as it really is, not as the documentation would like it to be :-). Jeremy.