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:   Tue, 10 Aug 2021 10:58:59 -0400
From:   "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To:     hedrick@rutgers.edu
Cc:     Timothy Pearson <tpearson@raptorengineering.com>,
        Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>,
        linux-nfs <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: CPU stall, eventual host hang with BTRFS + NFS under heavy load
Message-ID: <20210810145859.GB31222@fieldses.org>
References: <281642234.3818.1625478269194.JavaMail.zimbra@raptorengineeringinc.com>
 <1288667080.5652.1625478421955.JavaMail.zimbra@raptorengineeringinc.com>
 <B4D8C4B7-EE8C-456C-A6C5-D25FF1F3608E@rutgers.edu>
 <3A4DF3BB-955C-4301-BBED-4D5F02959F71@rutgers.edu>
 <359473237.1035413.1628528802863.JavaMail.zimbra@raptorengineeringinc.com>
 <2FEAFB26-C723-450D-A115-1D82841BBF73@rutgers.edu>
 <20210809183029.GC8394@fieldses.org>
 <413163A6-8484-4170-9877-C0C2D50B13C0@rutgers.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <413163A6-8484-4170-9877-C0C2D50B13C0@rutgers.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 10:57:10AM -0400, hedrick@rutgers.edu wrote:
> No. NFS 4.2 has a new feature that sends the umask. That means that
> ACLs specifying default permissions actually work. They don’t work in
> 4.0. Since that’s what I want to use ACLs for, effectively they don’t
> work in 4.0 Nothing you can do about that: it’s in the protocol
> definition. But it’s a reason we really want to use 4.2.

D'oh, I forgot the umask change.  Got it, makes sense.

--b.