Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mail-ig0-f182.google.com ([209.85.213.182]:41908 "EHLO mail-ig0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752203AbaC2UBT convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Mar 2014 16:01:19 -0400 Received: by mail-ig0-f182.google.com with SMTP id uy17so2133696igb.3 for ; Sat, 29 Mar 2014 13:01:18 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] nfsd: Don't return NFS4ERR_RESTOREFH for NFSv4.1+ From: Trond Myklebust In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 16:01:15 -0400 Cc: Idan Kedar , Linux NFS Mailing List Message-Id: <54B21F4C-18EC-45B9-B89C-DD05A0922DDE@primarydata.com> References: <1396118619-12771-1-git-send-email-trond.myklebust@primarydata.com> <1396118619-12771-2-git-send-email-trond.myklebust@primarydata.com> <20140329193456.GE11085@fieldses.org> To: Dr Fields James Bruce Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mar 29, 2014, at 15:49, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > On Mar 29, 2014, at 15:34, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > >> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 02:43:39PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote: >>> RFC5661 obsoletes NFS4ERR_RESTOREFH in favour of NFS4ERR_NOFILEHANDLE. >> >> Looks right. Any objection to just making this nfserr_restorefh in the >> 4.0 case as well? Hard to imagine how that could cause a 4.0 client any >> problem. > > You mean make both cases return nfserr_nofilehandle (as per RFC5661), right? So, I agree that most clients should handle that, but the problem is that RFC3530bis does not allow it. Either way, this is not a performance critical issue. Any time we get into this situation, it is because the client is utterly screwed up in the first place. The NFS4ERR_STALE_STATEID is the critical one that really needs to be applied... _________________________________ Trond Myklebust Linux NFS client maintainer, PrimaryData trond.myklebust@primarydata.com