Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2020 00:16:28 +0000 From: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> To: Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org>, freebsd-fs <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: go build, flock, and NFS_BADSEQID Message-ID: <YTBPR01MB337425F9D4803B7BFCD366E4DDE40@YTBPR01MB3374.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> In-Reply-To: <CAOtMX2iAKMqO1ztZ72U%2B%2BygoE3ywtbRA%2BZzTdLa6JaU_XcDbgQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAOtMX2gsSzpNgBCarT1xP4bD6e4SiN_Qo-RjpuogSjb1SWZBRA@mail.gmail.com> <YTBPR01MB33740785F12E0D2216F4AA28DDE70@YTBPR01MB3374.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <CAOtMX2h1P4KeYU9otRSZp_c=ZeSUzB01G9KNGUiv26puOLeQjQ@mail.gmail.com> <YTBPR01MB33747495BBC90CFC51D444EADDE70@YTBPR01MB3374.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>, <CAOtMX2iAKMqO1ztZ72U%2B%2BygoE3ywtbRA%2BZzTdLa6JaU_XcDbgQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Good to hear. For some reason, the IETF NFSv4 working group does a lot of work trying to get NFSv4.0 right. >From my point of view, it is just a typical .0 release that was fixed by th= e .1 release. Linux always uses the newest version supported by the server by default. Maybe I could get away with doing the same for FreeBSD? (For NFSv4 minor versions, not NFSv4 instead of NFSv3, which I think would be a POLA violation.) What do you think? rick Thanks, rick ________________________________________ From: Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> Sent: Monday, March 2, 2020 7:04 PM To: Rick Macklem; freebsd-fs Subject: Re: go build, flock, and NFS_BADSEQID Yep. Remounting with minorversion=3D1 fixed the problem. Thanks!. On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 3:51 PM Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca<mailto:rm= acklem@uoguelph.ca>> wrote: Oh and avoid "soft,intr" options on the mount. Those are pretty much guaranteed to result in a BADSEQID sooner or later. rick ps: It's in the Bugs section of "man mount_nfs", but nobody reads that far;= -) ________________________________________ From: Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org<mailto:asomers@freebsd.org>> Sent: Monday, March 2, 2020 5:40 PM To: Rick Macklem Cc: freebsd-fs; Rick Macklem Subject: Re: go build, flock, and NFS_BADSEQID Is that a mount option? Because it seems like I can't set it with "mount -= u". Do I need to completely unmount first? On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 3:28 PM Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca<mailto:rm= acklem@uoguelph.ca><mailto:rmacklem@uoguelph.ca<mailto:rmacklem@uoguelph.ca= >>> wrote: Try "minorversion=3D1". The seqid stuff is NFSv4.0 specific and shouldn't be broken, but NFSv4.1 fixed all this in better ways. rick ________________________________________ From: alan somers <asomers@gmail.com<mailto:asomers@gmail.com><mailto:asome= rs@gmail.com<mailto:asomers@gmail.com>>> Sent: Monday, March 2, 2020 2:31 PM To: freebsd-fs Cc: Rick Macklem Subject: go build, flock, and NFS_BADSEQID I'm trying to build a Go project with /usr/home mounted with NFSv4. The se= rver is running 12.0-RELEASE and the client is running 12.1-RELEASE. But t= he build reliably fails because flock(2) returns EACCES. Dtrace shows the = cause is nfsrpc_advlock returning NFS_BADSEQID. This sounds like an NFS bu= g (server, client, or both? I'm not sure). I'm not an NFS expert. Is thi= s something I should pursue, and would somebody please give me advise on ho= w to debug further? -Alan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?YTBPR01MB337425F9D4803B7BFCD366E4DDE40>