Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from fieldses.org ([174.143.236.118]:54668 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030330Ab3FTOt5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Jun 2013 10:49:57 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 10:49:55 -0400 From: "J. Bruce Fields" To: Sven Geggus Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Kerberized NFS-Server Problem still present in 3.10.0-rc2 Message-ID: <20130620144955.GB11728@fieldses.org> References: <20130619213412.GA2547@fieldses.org> <20130620080354.GA5591@geggus.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20130620080354.GA5591@geggus.net> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:03:55AM +0200, Sven Geggus wrote: > J. Bruce Fields schrieb am Mittwoch, den 19. Juni um 23:34 Uhr: > > > Apologies, I don't remember the previous discussion, so, could you > > summarize for me? > > Shure! > My original bug-report ist here: > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-nfs/msg37454.html > > > - you're able to reproduce/not reproduce the problem by changing > > *only* the kernel on the nfs server between 3.8.x and > > 3.10.0-rc2 ? > > Exactly. See also the Postings of Richard van den Toorn on the list. > > Summary: Mount is locking when upgrading from 3.8.x to 3.9.x > > Unfortunately I was unable to do a git bisect because somewhere on the way > the behaviour changed from locking to "permission denied". > > If you give me a hint if this behaviour should be marked as good or bad I > can continue bisecting! > > > - have you figured out exactly where the failure happens?: > > No because I have not been able to do git bisect to the end. > > > - which version of NFS are you using? > > NFS4 with Kerberos authentication. What happens with NFSv3? > > Also if you haven't already it would be useful to know at exactly which > > step of the process it's failing. As a first step running wireshark on > > the traffic between client and server and looking for a NULL > > init_sec_context rpc call and seeing whether it succeeds or not, would > > be useful. > > I already posted a wireshark dump: > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-nfs/msg37472.html So it looks it did a null init_sec_context establishment and then the server didn't reply to the first rpc call using the new context. But it's hard to be sure without more details--could I get the binary dump? That might be explained by the problem fixed by 3c34ae11fac3b30629581d0bfaf80f58e82cfbfb "nfsd: fix krb5 handling of anonymous principals", but that was already in v3.9. --b.