On 09/15/2010 04:09 PM, Steve Dickson wrote:
> On 09/14/2010 09:23 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:
>> On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 15:32:40 -0400
>> Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Steve,
>>
>> It's been a couple of weeks and this latest patch hasn't been committed...
>>
>> IIRC, you wanted changes to the xlog messages and were going to send an
>> alternate patch. I'd like to see this in the next release of nfs-utils.
>> What do we need to do to move this to resolution?
> Sorry for taking so long to get to this..
>
> What I was thinking is to simply make the error messages more definitive
> as to what the problem is and how to fix it.. Logging that we are
> falling back to the legacy probably would not mean much to mere
> mortals... IMHO...
>
> I still think at some point nfsd should fail to start up, but logging
> an error message at this point is fine..
>
> Comments?
>
> steved.
>
> commit 8a78cb2e651d55fc1aaacf1e4ca9c009d1cf9113
> Author: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wed Sep 15 15:54:36 2010 -0400
>
> rpc.nfsd: mount up nfsdfs is it doesn't appear to be mounted yet (try #3)
>
> There's a bit of a chicken and egg problem when nfsd is run the first
> time. On Fedora/RHEL at least, /proc/fs/nfsd is mounted up whenever nfsd
> is plugged in via a modprobe.conf "install" directive.
>
> If someone runs rpc.nfsd without plugging in nfsd.ko first,
> /proc/fs/nfsd won't be mounted and rpc.nfsd will end up using the legacy
> nfsctl interface. After that, nfsd will be plugged in and subsequent
> rpc.nfsd invocations will use that instead.
>
> This is a problem as some nfsd command-line options are ignored when the
> legacy interface is used. It'll also be a problem for people who want
> IPv6 enabled servers. The upshot is that we really don't want to use the
> legacy interface unless there is no other option.
>
> To avoid this situation, have rpc.nfsd check to see if the "threads"
> file is already present. If it's not, then make an attempt to mount
> /proc/fs/nfsd. This is a "best-effort" sort of thing, however so we
> just ignore the return code from the mount attempt and fall back to
> using nfsctl() if it fails.
>
> Signed-off-by: Steve Dickson <steved@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> diff --git a/utils/nfsd/nfsd.c b/utils/nfsd/nfsd.c
> index 1cda1e5..658b8fa 100644
> --- a/utils/nfsd/nfsd.c
> +++ b/utils/nfsd/nfsd.c
> @@ -246,6 +246,9 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> exit(1);
> }
>
> + /* make sure nfsdfs is mounted if it's available */
> + nfssvc_mount_nfsdfs(progname);
> +
> /* can only change number of threads if nfsd is already up */
> if (nfssvc_inuse()) {
> socket_up = 1;
> diff --git a/utils/nfsd/nfssvc.c b/utils/nfsd/nfssvc.c
> index 34c67ca..f7edcba 100644
> --- a/utils/nfsd/nfssvc.c
> +++ b/utils/nfsd/nfssvc.c
> @@ -15,9 +15,11 @@
> #include <netdb.h>
> #include <netinet/in.h>
> #include <arpa/inet.h>
> +#include <sys/stat.h>
> #include <unistd.h>
> #include <fcntl.h>
> #include <errno.h>
> +#include <stdlib.h>
>
> #include "nfslib.h"
> #include "xlog.h"
> @@ -31,9 +33,13 @@
> */
> #undef IPV6_SUPPORTED
>
> -#define NFSD_PORTS_FILE "/proc/fs/nfsd/portlist"
> -#define NFSD_VERS_FILE "/proc/fs/nfsd/versions"
> -#define NFSD_THREAD_FILE "/proc/fs/nfsd/threads"
> +#ifndef NFSD_FS_DIR
> +#define NFSD_FS_DIR "/proc/fs/nfsd"
> +#endif
> +
> +#define NFSD_PORTS_FILE NFSD_FS_DIR "/portlist"
> +#define NFSD_VERS_FILE NFSD_FS_DIR "/versions"
> +#define NFSD_THREAD_FILE NFSD_FS_DIR "/threads"
>
> /*
> * declaring a common static scratch buffer here keeps us from having to
> @@ -44,6 +50,45 @@
> char buf[128];
>
> /*
> + * Using the "new" interfaces for nfsd requires that /proc/fs/nfsd is
> + * actually mounted. Make an attempt to mount it here if it doesn't appear
> + * to be. If the mount attempt fails, no big deal -- fall back to using nfsctl
> + * instead.
> + */
> +void
> +nfssvc_mount_nfsdfs(char *progname)
> +{
> + int err;
> + struct stat statbuf;
> +
> + err = stat(NFSD_THREAD_FILE, &statbuf);
> + if (err == 0)
> + return;
> + else if (errno != ENOENT) {
> + xlog(L_ERROR, "Unable to stat %s: errno %d (%m)",
> + NFSD_THREAD_FILE, errno);
> + return;
> + }
One minor nit I just noticed... we really don't need
that else if clause... it can be just an if clause...
unless I'm missing something...
steved.
--
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
