Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Git clone fails in p9 file system marked with FANOTIFY

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 7:25 AM Krishna Vivek Vitta
<kvitta@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Amir
>
> Thanks for the reply.
>
> We have another image with kernel version: 6.6.36.3. git clone operation fails there as well. Do we need to still try with 5.15.154 kernel version ?

No need.

>
> Currently, we are marking the mount points with mask(FAN_CLOSE_WRITE) to handle only close_write events. Do we need to add any other flag in mask and check ?

No need.

>
> Following is the mount entry in /proc/mounts file:
> C:\134 /mnt/c 9p rw,noatime,aname=drvfs;path=C:\;uid=0;gid=0;symlinkroot=/mnt/,cache=5,access=client,msize=65536,trans=fd,rfd=4,wfd=4 0 0

I don't know this symlinkroot feature.
It looks like a WSL2 feature (?) and my guess is that the failure
might be related.
Not sure how fanotify mount mark affects this, maybe because the
close_write events
open the file for reporting the event, but maybe you should try to ask
your question
also the WSL2 kernel maintainers.

I have tried to reproduce your test case on the 9p mount on my test box:
v_tmp on /vtmp type 9p (rw,relatime,access=client,msize=262144,trans=virtio)

with fanotify examples program:
https://manpages.debian.org/unstable/manpages/fanotify.7.en.html#Example_program:_fanotify_example.c

and could not reproduce the issue with plain:
echo 123 > x && mv x y && cat y

>
> Attached is the strace for failed git clone operation(line: 419, 420).

All the failures are ENOENT, which is why I suspect maybe related to
the symlinkroot thing.

> Even I wrote a small program to invoke rename, followed with open.
> The open fails immediately and succeeds after 3-4 iterations.
> This exercise was performed on p9 file system marked with fanotify.

Please share your reproducer program.
The difference could be in the details.
Can you test in a 9p mount without those WSL options?
Can you test on upstream or LTS kernel?
Can you test with the fanotify example?

>
> Am not reporting this as regression. We havent checked this behavior before.
>

Ok. patience, we will try to get to the bottom of this.

Thanks,
Amir.





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [NTFS 3]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [NTFS 3]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux