On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 02:17:27PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 04/05/2012 10:53 AM, Bruce Fields wrote: > >On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 10:35:40AM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: > >>On 03/29/2012 03:17 PM, Dr James Bruce Fields wrote: > >>>On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 05:08:38PM -0400, Dr James Bruce Fields wrote: > >>>>Anyway, something like the following (untested) should change v3 to > >>>>return nfs_ok in this case, and v4 to return the same errors it would on > >>>>a non-create open. > >>> > >>>Looking at the history, I think the v3 behavior has been there from the > >>>start. I wonder why we've never gotten a bug report? > >>> > >>>Looking at wireshark.... I guess the client always does a lookup first, > >>>so we never hit this case (unless someone replaces the file by a > >>>non-regular-file between a lookup and a create?) > >>> > >>>--b. > >> > >>So, is this all set to eventually make it into the mainline kernel? > >>Or is there still something I can do to help move it along? > > > >If you could confirm whether the patch in > > > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-nfs/msg28840.html > > > >fixes your problem, that would help. > > > >--b. > > I applied it to 2.6.32-220.7.1.el6.x86_64 and it appears to have > fixed the issue. Can't be sure yet if it broke anything else > though... Great, thanks. I'm applying as follows. I want to run in through some basic regression tests and then I'll see about getting it upstream. (Though it's a bug we've apparently lived with since the beginning of time, so it may need to wait for the next merge window.) --b. -- 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
