Apologies for dragging up an old thread, but I've had to tackle wayward negative lookup storms again and I have obviously half forgotten what I learned in this thread last time (even after re-reading it!). Can I just ask if I understand correctly and that there was an intention a long time ago to be able to serve negative dentries from a "complete" READDIRPLUS result? https://www.cs.helsinki.fi/linux/linux-kernel/2002-30/0108.html So if we did a readdirplus on a directory then immediately fired random non existent lookups at the directory, it could be served from the readdirplus result? i.e. not in readdir result, then return ENOENT without needing to ask server? But that is not the case today because you can't track the "completeness" of a READDIRPLUS result for a directory over time (in page cache)? Or is it all due to needing to deal with case insensitive filesystems (which I would think effects positive lookups too)? I did try to decipher the v6.6 fs/nfs/dir.c READDIR bits but I quickly got lost... Cheers, Daire On Thu, 1 Sept 2022 at 16:49, Daire Byrne <daire@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Yea, got it now. That all makes sense. Thanks! > > Apologies for the noise. Now I just have to go and fix a bunch of our > user's code so I can forget about negative lookups again... > > Daire > > On Thu, 1 Sept 2022 at 16:43, Trond Myklebust <trondmy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2022-09-01 at 16:27 +0100, Daire Byrne wrote: > > > On Thu, 1 Sept 2022 at 14:55, Trond Myklebust > > > <trondmy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > man 5 nfs > > > > > > > > Look for the section on the 'lookupcache=mode' mount option. > > > > > > So I get that the client caches negative lookups once we've made them > > > (the default lookupcache=all), but what I'm wondering is if we have > > > already cached the entire directory contents before the (negative) > > > lookup, can we not reply that it doesn't exist using that information > > > without having to go across the wire the at all (even the first > > > time)? > > > > > > Or is there no concept of "cached directory contents"? I thought that > > > maybe readdir/readdirplus knew about the "full contents" of a > > > directory? > > > > > > My thinking was that if we did a readdir/readirplus first, we could > > > then do lookups for any random non-existent filename without having > > > to > > > send anything across the wire. Like I said, a newbie question with > > > limited understanding of the actual internals :) > > > > > > Daire > > > > There is no concept of a 'fully cached directory'. The VFS and the > > memory management code are free to kick out any unused cached entries > > from the dcache at any time and for any reason. So the absence of an > > entry is not the same as a negative entry. > > > > Furthermore, certain features like case insensitive filesystems on > > servers makes it hard for the NFS client to know whether or not a > > specific name will or won't match an entry returned by readdir. In > > those circumstances, even if you think you have cached the entire > > directory, you are not guaranteed to know whether the lookup will fail > > or succeed. > > > > -- > > Trond Myklebust > > Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace > > trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > >
