> On Nov 12, 2018, at 3:57 PM, Trond Myklebust <trondmy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Mon, 2018-11-12 at 18:01 -0500, bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>> On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 09:17:16PM +0000, Trond Myklebust wrote: >>>> On Mon, 2018-11-12 at 13:24 -0500, bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 05:59:33PM +0000, Trond Myklebust wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 2018-11-10 at 16:49 -0500, Bruce Fields wrote: >>>>>> Looks like it's the fault of >>>>>> >>>>>> 07d02a67b7faae "SUNRPC: Simplify lookup code" >>>>> >>>>> I'm having trouble reproducing this bug. I've tried both cthon >>>>> and >>>>> xfstests in a loop, so far without success (both NFSv3 and >>>>> v4.1, >>>>> but >>>>> only sec=sys). Is there anything else you're doing that I might >>>>> try? >>>>> >>>>> e.g. Are you running multiple workloads in parallel? Different >>>>> users?.. >>>> >>>> Nothing that interesting. Currently it's connectathon over v4, >>>> v3, >>>> v4/krb5, v3/krb5, v4/krb5i, v4/krb5p, v4.1, v4.1/krb5, but just >>>> serially >>>> one after the other. Then some pynfs tests (which bypass the >>>> client), >>>> then xfstests over v4.2/sys. And also a few one-off locking >>>> tests of >>>> my >>>> own that probably aren't a factor here. >>>> >>>> (Hah, I just realized I was mounting with vers=4 and assuming >>>> that >>>> meant >>>> 4.0, but actually it's changed over time depending on the >>>> defaults, >>>> so >>>> currently those "v4" runs are actually all 4.2. Gah.) >>> >>> Are you perhaps both using RPCSEC_GSS w/ integrity checking for >>> your >>> EXCHANGE_ID authentication? The client will attempt to use that by >>> default if rpc.gssd is running. >> >> Yes, in addition to the krb5i mount I'd expect the sys/krb5/krb5p >> mounts >> are using krb5i for EXCHANGE_ID. >> >>> I ask because I think the issue might be with RPCSEC_GSS, >>> specifically >>> with the RPCSEC_GSS context destroy code, hence the 2 patches that >>> I >>> just sent out. >> >> Looks like my tests pass after applying those two patches. >> > > Cool! Thanks for testing. > > Chuck, do you think the above might also explain your sighting of the > same Oops? Could be, I don’t think I saw it until I started testing NFSv4. I won’t be able to confirm that until next week. > Cheers > Trond > > -- > Trond Myklebust > Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace > trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >
