Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2018 02:10:42 +0000 From: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> To: Daniel Engel <daniel@ftml.net>, "freebsd-stable@freebsd.org" <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: NFS 4.1 RECLAIM_COMPLETE FS failed error Message-ID: <YTXPR0101MB0959ED2C40E04C2B2B034779DD440@YTXPR0101MB0959.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> In-Reply-To: <1531087387.2543270.1433935616.5272EA26@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <1531087387.2543270.1433935616.5272EA26@webmail.messagingengine.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Daniel Engel wrote: [stuff snipped] >I traced the commits that Rick has made since that thread and merged them = 'head' >into 'stable': > > 'svnlite checkout http://svn.freebsd.org/base/release/11.1.0/' > 'svnlite merge -c 332790 http://svn.freebsd.org/base/head' > 'svnlite merge -c 333508 http://svn.freebsd.org/base/head' > 'svnlite merge -c 333579 http://svn.freebsd.org/base/head' > 'svnlite merge -c 333580 http://svn.freebsd.org/base/head' > 'svnlite merge -c 333592 http://svn.freebsd.org/base/head' > 'svnlite merge -c 333645 http://svn.freebsd.org/base/head' > 'svnlite merge -c 333766 http://svn.freebsd.org/base/head' > 'svnlite merge -c 334396 http://svn.freebsd.org/base/head' > 'svnlite merge -c 334492 http://svn.freebsd.org/base/head' > 'svnlite merge -c 327674 http://svn.freebsd.org/base/head' Yes, you have all the commits to head related to the 4.1 server that might = affect the ESXi client, plus a bunch that should be harmless, but I don't think af= fect the ESXi client mounts. (Most of these will get MFC'd to stable/11, but I h= aven't gotten around to it yet.) The ones that might be in 6.7 (they were in 6.5) that may bite you are: - The client does an OpenDownGrade with all OPEN_SHARE_ACCESS and OPEN_SHARE_DENY bits set for something it calls a "drive lock". (Adding bits is supposed to be done via an Open/ClaimNull and not OpenDowngrade.) I'd really like to know if this still happens for 6.7? - Something about "directory modified too often" when doing deletion of a b= unch of files. (I have no idea what this one means, but apparently it was seen= for other NFSv4.1 servers.) - Some warnings about "wrong reason for not issuing a delegation". I have a= fix for this one in PR#226650, but they are just warnings and don't seem to matter much. The rest of the really nasty stuff happens after a server reboot. The recov= ery code seemed to be badly broken in the 6.5 client. (All sorts of fun stuff like t= he client looping doiing ExchangeID operations forever. VM crashes...) >That completely fixed the connection instability, but the NFS share was st= ill mounting >read-only with a RECLAIM_COMPLETE error. So, I manually appl= ied the first patch >from the previous thread and everything started workin= g: > > --- fs/nfsserver/nfs_nfsdserv.c.savrecl 2018-02-10 20:34:31.166445= 000 -0500 > +++ fs/nfsserver/nfs_nfsdserv.c 2018-02-10 20:36:07.947490000 -050= 0 > @@ -4226,10 +4226,9 @@ nfsrvd_reclaimcomplete(struct nfsrv_desc > goto nfsmout; > } > NFSM_DISSECT(tl, uint32_t *, NFSX_UNSIGNED); > + nd->nd_repstat =3D nfsrv_checkreclaimcomplete(nd); > if (*tl =3D=3D newnfs_true) > - nd->nd_repstat =3D NFSERR_NOTSUPP; > - else > - nd->nd_repstat =3D nfsrv_checkreclaimcomplete(nd); > + nd->nd_repstat =3D 0; I think this patch is ok to use, since no other extant client does a Reclai= mComplete with "one_fs =3D=3D true". It does kinda violate the RFC. The problem is that FreeBSD exports a hierarchy of file systems and telling= the server that one of them has been reclaimed is useless. (This hack just assu= mes the client meant to say "one_fs =3D=3D false".) There was also a case (I think it was after a server reboot) where the clie= nt would do one of these after doing a ReclaimComplete with "one_fs =3D=3D false" an= d that is definitely bogus (the server would reply NFS4ERR_ALREADY_COMPLETE without the above hack) since the "one_fs =3D=3D false" operation means all file sy= stems have been reclaimed. Anyhow, once I get some packet traces from Andreas for 6.7, I'll try and fi= gure out how to handle at least some of the outstanding issues. Good luck with it, rick
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?YTXPR0101MB0959ED2C40E04C2B2B034779DD440>