On Wed, 2009-03-18 at 17:42 +0100, Diego Moreno wrote: > Thanks for your quick reply Trond. I've seen the only way to pass my > test is using (for kernel 2.6.29-rc8): -olookupcache=positive,noac. If I > use -olookupcache=positive or -olookupcache=all or > -olookupcache=all,noac my test doesn't pass. Sorry. You're right... The -olookupcache option only affects lookup of new files (and I should have said "-olookupcache=positive" or "-olookupcache=none"). In this test case you are, however doing an 'ls', not a lookup. The resulting opendir() call will always check if the directory has changed or not on the NFS server (irrespective of whether or not you use 'noac'). The decision on whether or not to rely on the cached readdir data then depends entirely on whether or not the server returns a new value for the NFSv4 change_attribute or the mtime. The problem therefore is, as I indicated earlier, that the server is telling the client that nothing changed because it has too poor mtime resolution... > BTW, is there any way of passing this test for a kernel like 2.6.27 > (there is no lookupcache mount option). In kernels like 2.6.19 or 2.6.20 > I think I passed my test just using noac option. These kernels where the > first kernels with the patch (commit > b0b539739fe9b7d75002412a787cfdf4efddbc33) treating the special case of > nfsi->attrtimeo==0. That means 'noac' or/and actimeo=0 mount options. 'noac' cannot fix this problem. Cheers Trond -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
