Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 20 Apr 2020 10:35:39 -0400
From:   "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@redhat.com>
To:     "Su, Yanjun" <suyj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc:     linux-nfs <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
        "mora@netapp.com" <mora@netapp.com>
Subject: Re: about nfscache problem
Message-ID: <20200420143539.GA102318@pick.fieldses.org>
References: <7610f9108e1342258c25b3bc72c92a67@G08CNEXMBPEKD05.g08.fujitsu.local>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <7610f9108e1342258c25b3bc72c92a67@G08CNEXMBPEKD05.g08.fujitsu.local>
Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 08:13:51AM +0000, Su, Yanjun wrote:
> At this time, the nfscache problem has not progressed for long time. Do we still need to follow it?
> 
> The problem is as below
> The test commandline is as below:
> ./nfstest_cache --nfsversion=4 -e /nfsroot --server 192.168.102.143
> --client 192.168.102.142 --runtest acregmax_data --verbose all
> 
> More detail info is here:
> https://linuxlists.cc/l/17/linux-nfs/t/3063683/(patch)_cache:_fix_test_script_as_delegation_being_introduced
> 
> This patch adds compatible code for nfsv3 and nfsv4.
> When we test nfsv4, just use 'chmod' to recall delegation, then
> run the test. As 'chmod' will modify atime, so use 'noatime' mount option.
> 
> After a discusion with you, a chmod is a reliable way to recall delegations.
>
> Can you contact mora and make a decision for it?

I don't have any better way to contact him than the address cc'd above.

Remind me what the problem is?  How is the test failing?

--b.