Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 09:46:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 09:46:16 -0500 Received: from mons.uio.no ([129.240.130.14]:65191 "EHLO mons.uio.no") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 09:46:02 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Trond Myklebust Organization: Dept. of Physics, University of Oslo To: NIIBE Yutaka Subject: Re: BUG REPORT: kernel nfs between 2.4.19-pre2 (server) and 2.2.21-pre3 (client) Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 15:45:38 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] Cc: Stephan von Krawczynski , linux-kernel In-Reply-To: <15509.47571.248407.537415@charged.uio.no> <200203182357.g2INvIB13203@mule.m17n.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 19. March 2002 00:57, NIIBE Yutaka wrote: > File handle must be unique. But I think that it may be reused (for > different type). Client side cache should handle this case, IMO. No... >From RFC1094: ---------------- 2.3.3. fhandle typedef opaque fhandle[FHSIZE]; The "fhandle" is the file handle passed between the server and the client. All file operations are done using file handles to refer to a file or directory. The file handle can contain whatever information the server needs to distinguish an individual file. ----------------- IOW: the server is required to distinguish an individual file. Note that there is no time limit on this: if I try to write to a file that was deleted behind my back, the server is supposed to be able to determine which file I was writing to. This is further clarified in RFC1813: ----------------- If two file handles from the same server are equal, they must refer to the same file ------------------ Again: at no point does the RFC say that there is a timelimit on the above (unlike the so-called 'volatile filehandles' that were introduced for NFSv4) Indeed if you think about it, then there is no way the RFC *can* allow the client to take the burden: we are talking about a stateless system. Unless the server has a way of notifying the client that a filehandle is invalid, and/or the file was deleted there is no way that the client can know... Cheers, Trond - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/