On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 11:01:36PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 11:59:00AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> > This contains about 12 commits new since Sept 1 and the last 6 are only >> > appearing in linux-next today (though I did not do Friday and Monday's >> > linux-next). Not judging, just noting. >> >> And one of tese recent commits causes a regression for block layouts >> in xfstests generic/075. Still need to check which one. > > "NFSv4.1/pNFS: Don't request a minimal read layout beyond the end of file" > > is the culprit, posted to the list for the first time and committed on > Aug 31. That looks like it is tickling a server protocol bug. The minimum length is just that; a minimum. If the server wants the layout to be block aligned, then it is supposed to adjust the returned offset + length values so that they cover the range described by the offset+minimum length (see table 13 on https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5661#page-540). The server is only supposed to fail the LAYOUTGET request if it is completely unable to meet those requirements. Furthermore, it is supposed to return either NFS4ERR_BADLAYOUT or NFS4ERR_LAYOUTTRYLATER (depending on what the value of the minimum layout was); as far as I can see, the current code is returning NFS4ERR_LAYOUTUNAVAILABLE. 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
