From: Maxim Levitsky Subject: Re: 2.6.24-rc3-git4 NFS crossmnt regression [SOLVED] Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 04:01:56 +0200 Message-ID: <200712120401.57128.maximlevitsky@gmail.com> References: <200712101705.30428.maximlevitsky@gmail.com> <20071210130305.d8983fdc.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Cc: bfields@fieldses.org, neilb@suse.de, rjw@sisk.pl, trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no, gnome42@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ebiederm@xmission.com, den@openvz.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org To: Andrew Morton Return-path: Received: from mu-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.134.187]:60871 "EHLO mu-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752000AbXLLCCd (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Dec 2007 21:02:33 -0500 Received: by mu-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id i10so75145mue.5 for ; Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:02:31 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20071210130305.d8983fdc.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Monday 10 December 2007 23:03:05 Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:05:30 +0200 > Maxim Levitsky wrote: > > > On Monday 10 December 2007 16:36:09 J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 04:19:12PM +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote: > > > > ... > > > > > It is best not to use nohide - we should probably mark it as > > > > > 'legacy'. > > > > > > > > > > Simply export the top level mountpoint as 'crossmnt' and everything > > > > > below there will be exported. > > > > > > > > > > > Where should I put those options in root file-system export or in submount export? > > > > > > > > > > crossmnt goes at the top. nohide goes in the submount. Both have > > > > > the same general effect though with subtle differences. > > > > > You don't need both (though that doesn't hurt). > > > > > Just use crossmnt at the top, Then you don't need to mention the > > > > > lower level filesystems at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > (I decided to switch to NFS4 only due to the lack of ability to see underlying mounts) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All of this should work fine with v3. Once you have the right patch > > > > > for the crossmnt bug applied, if you have further problems post them > > > > > to linux-nfs-u79uwXL29TaiAVqoAR/hOA@public.gmane.org > > > > > > > > > > NeilBrown > > > > > > > > > > > > > Big thanks, > > > > > > > > Still NFS server just don't want to accept the connection > > > > I noticed that if I first mount with > > > > -tnfs, unmount, and then mount with -tnfs4, it works > > > > > > OK, in that case, that's definitely the bug Eric sent out the patch for; > > > you may want to try applying his patch. > > You mean > > "[PATCH 2.6.24-rc4] proc: Remove/Fix proc generic d_revalidate" ? > > > > I did apply it (on both kernel and server), and it doesn't help. > > argh, this is getting bad. > > Can you please test the below patch asap? Against 2.6.24-rc4 or latest-linus. > > > From: Andrew Morton > > Revert > > commit 2b1e300a9dfc3196ccddf6f1d74b91b7af55e416 > Author: Eric W. Biederman > Date: Sun Dec 2 00:33:17 2007 +1100 > Hi, I finally solved this. There is no need to revert 2b1e300a9dfc3196ccddf6f1d74b91b7af55e416. It was actually a deadly mixture of 3 bugs: 1) Stale handles - Trond's patch fixes it, but I somehow missed it. 2) Empty /proc/fs/nfsd (which causes nfs4 failures, and masks the bug #1, since with it the subfolders are just empty) [PATCH 2.6.24-rc4] proc: Remove/Fix proc generic d_revalidate fixes it 3) And as I expected, a userspace bug, which believe me or not has exactly the same symptoms like #2 (and doesn't depend on others) It is a wrong boot script in BLFS that starts nfs daemons in wrong order. So there are 3 bugs and each masks the former one :-) . I revised boot script to use recommended order like in nfs-utils. And finally everything works.... Best regards, Maxim Levitsky