Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 09:39:50 +0100 From: Doug Rabson <dfr@rabson.org> To: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> Cc: "freebsd-fs@freebsd.org" <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>, "jim@ks.uiuc.edu" <jim@ks.uiuc.edu> Subject: Re: NFSv4 Linux client atime for exclusive create Message-ID: <CACA0VUjVg6BZc4SarH6UVn1DBrJc7MdfLkmKcbgq0OR1ExwD7Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <YTXPR01MB0189EF41F4122B0162A76F0DDD180@YTXPR01MB0189.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> References: <YTXPR01MB018992D6CDD2A578B4AC946BDD050@YTXPR01MB0189.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <CACA0VUgkRphRLQh%2BFBcCEb=gB=YdjVFEncor64x1qqov7K4%2Bhw@mail.gmail.com> <YTXPR01MB0189374B9DCCB8D0219FA299DD180@YTXPR01MB0189.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <YTXPR01MB0189EF41F4122B0162A76F0DDD180@YTXPR01MB0189.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
That was actually going to me my next suggestion, honest. Hopefully that fixes the problem, if not its a bug in the Linux client. On 19 April 2017 at 22:26, Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> wrote: > Hope you don't mind a quick top post related to my last email... > I just looked in the new RFC for NFSv4.0 and it notes that the reply > to Open should specify the attribute(s) used to store the create_verifier. > Either this wasn't in the original RFC (3530) or I never read it, because > the > FreeBSD NFSv4.0 server doesn't do this. > > I'll come up with a patch that sets the atime bit in the EXCLUSIVE4 Open > reply and see if that changes the Linux client behaviour. > > Also, the server doesn't set this bit in the EXCLUSIVE4_1 reply as RFC5661 > says it should, so I need to patch this too. > > I suspect this will fix the problem without using an extended attribute to > store the create_verifier. > > Having said that, I think that storing the create_verifier in an extended > attribute > might be a good idea, for file systems that support them? > > Thanks for the comments that convinced me to take another look at the > RFCs, rick > ________________________________________ > From: owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org <owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> on > behalf of Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> > Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 4:29:08 PM > To: Doug Rabson > Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org; jim@ks.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: NFSv4 Linux client atime for exclusive create > > Doug Rabson wrote: > >Is the client using EXCLUSIVE4 or EXCLUSIVE4_1 for the open? If its > EXCLUSIVE4_1, i.e. the >mode which allows attribute setting during the > open, the client should use the value of >the supattr_exclcreat attribute > (see section 5.8.1.14 of rfc5661) to figure out what >attributes can be > set. In this case, supattr_exclcreat should not include atime which should > >force the client to update it separately. > The packet trace Jim sent me was NFSv4.0 and, as such, used EXCLUSIVE4. > (The Open was followed by a Setattr in a separate compound RPC that only > specified > the "mode" attribute. The client never seemed to specify an atime.) > > I haven't tried an NFSv4.1 mount yet, but I need to take a look at it. > (I did succeed in reproducing the problem with an NFSV4.0 mount from a > Linux > box I have.) > > >It would be helpful to see a packet trace for this which should make it > clearer what is >happening here. > Jim did send me this off list. > > I now have a patch that stores the create_verifier in an extended > attribute and I think > that should be fine? (It does imply that NFSv4.0 read/write mounts will > only work > correctly for server file systems that support extended attributes, but I > think that > is a reasonable restriction that can't be avoided?) > [stuff snipped] > > rick > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CACA0VUjVg6BZc4SarH6UVn1DBrJc7MdfLkmKcbgq0OR1ExwD7Q>