On 9/25/18 10:21 PM, Jianhong Yin wrote: > > ----- 原始邮件 ----- >> 发件人: "Steve Dickson" <SteveD@xxxxxxxxxx> >> 收件人: jiyin@xxxxxxxxxx >> 抄送: linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Jianhong.Yin" <yin-jianhong@xxxxxxx> >> 发送时间: 星期二, 2018年 9 月 25日 下午 11:40:03 >> 主题: Re: [PATCH] nfs-utils mount: recover the lost EBUSY >> >> >> >> On 9/17/18 7:38 AM, jiyin@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>> From: "Jianhong.Yin" <yin-jianhong@xxxxxxx> >>> >>> see: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1629705 >>> [nfs-utils] mount -osharecache failure but return 'true' >>> >>> mount.nfs4 -o context=system_u:object_r:user_home_dir_t:s0,sharecache >>> $serv:$expdir $nfsmp >>> mount.nfs4 -o context=system_u:object_r:xferlog_t:s0,sharecache >>> $serv:$expdir $nfsmp2 >>> ^^^ here mount fail, but return true. it confuse user! >>> >>> Anyway, we should not hide the failure and pretend that it >>> does not exist. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jianhong Yin <yin-jianhong@xxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> utils/mount/stropts.c | 9 --------- >>> 1 file changed, 9 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/utils/mount/stropts.c b/utils/mount/stropts.c >>> index 4d2e37e..ca5bc7f 100644 >>> --- a/utils/mount/stropts.c >>> +++ b/utils/mount/stropts.c >>> @@ -1078,15 +1078,6 @@ static int nfsmount_fg(struct nfsmount_info *mi) >>> if (nfs_try_mount(mi)) >>> return EX_SUCCESS; >>> >>> - if (errno == EBUSY) >>> - /* The only cause of EBUSY is if exactly the desired >>> - * filesystem is already mounted. That can arguably >>> - * be seen as success. "mount -a" tries to optimise >>> - * out this case but sometimes fails. Help it out >>> - * by pretending everything is rosy >>> - */ >>> - return EX_SUCCESS; >>> - >>> if (nfs_is_permanent_error(errno)) >>> break; >>> >>> >> It code is here because of commit 3904d8102 which argues >> the re-mounting of a filesystem that is already mounted >> is not an error... which I tend to agree with... > Got it. > > how about : change in kernel if (re-mounting && busy) return TRUE from syscall->mount Propose on to see where it goes... steved. > >> >> steved. >>
