On 23/04/13 14:40, Mimi Zohar wrote: > On Tue, 2013-04-23 at 14:04 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote: >> On 23/04/13 13:22, J. Bruce Fields wrote: >>>>> What exactly was failing? >>>>> >>>>> Sorry I can't find the results right now. I'll re-run and let you know. >>> The server is returning -EOPNOTSUPP in response to an nfs4 SETATTR which >>> sets a mode. >>> >>> The operation shouldn't be failing, and if it does it should return an >>> NFS error, not -ERRNO. >>> >>> I can't reproduce this just by doing chmod on the linux client. I'm not >>> sure what pynfs is doing differently to trigger the bug. >> thanks for talking a look... >> >> Hmm... I wonder if the fact nfsd4_set_nfs4_label() is returning >> -EOPNOTSUPP instead of something like nfserr_attrnotsupp when >> labels are not configured... Something you've pointed out >> twice now... >> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-nfs/msg36104.html >> >> If it is this problem I wonder why a chmod would not trigger it... > > Do you by any chance have EVM enabled? EVM includes the i_mode in the > HMAC calculation. Anytime the i_mode changes, the existing HMAC is > verified, before recalculating the HMAC to reflect the change. The > hooks are there to update the HMAC, when using chmod. No. CONFIG_EVM is not set. steved. > > I posted a couple of patches to audit this type of error last week, but > haven't sent a pull request yet. > > evm: audit integrity metadata failures > integrity: move integrity_audit_msg() > evm: calculate HMAC after initializing posix acl > > thanks, > > Mimi > > > -- > 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 > -- 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
