On Tue, 06 Sep 2022, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 04:29:16PM +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote:
> > Bruce reminded me I'm not the only one seeing this failure
> > these days:
> >
> > > nfs/001 4s ... - output mismatch (see /root/xfstests-dev/results//nfs/001.out.bad)
> > > --- tests/nfs/001.out 2019-12-20 17:34:10.569343364 -0500
> > > +++ /root/xfstests-dev/results//nfs/001.out.bad 2022-09-04 20:01:35.502462323 -0400
> > > @@ -1,2 +1,2 @@
> > > QA output created by 001
> > > -203
> > > +3
> > > ...
> >
> > I'm looking at about 5 other priority bugs at the moment. Can
> > someone else do a little triage?
>
> For what it's worth, a bisect lands on
> c0cbe70742f4a70893cd6e5f6b10b6e89b6db95b "NFSD: add posix ACLs to struct
> nfsd_attrs".
>
> Haven't really looked at nfs/001 except to note it does have something
> to do with ACLs, so that checks out....
I see the problem.
acl setting was moved to nfsd_setattr().
But nfsd_setattr() contains the lines
if (!iap->ia_valid)
return 0;
In the setacl case, ia_valid is 0.
Maybe something like:
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/vfs.c b/fs/nfsd/vfs.c
index 528afc3be7af..0582a5b16237 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/vfs.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/vfs.c
@@ -395,9 +395,6 @@ nfsd_setattr(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct svc_fh *fhp,
if (S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))
iap->ia_valid &= ~ATTR_MODE;
- if (!iap->ia_valid)
- return 0;
-
nfsd_sanitize_attrs(inode, iap);
if (check_guard && guardtime != inode->i_ctime.tv_sec)
@@ -448,8 +445,10 @@ nfsd_setattr(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct svc_fh *fhp,
goto out_unlock;
}
- iap->ia_valid |= ATTR_CTIME;
- host_err = notify_change(&init_user_ns, dentry, iap, NULL);
+ if (iap->ia_valid) {
+ iap->ia_valid |= ATTR_CTIME;
+ host_err = notify_change(&init_user_ns, dentry, iap, NULL);
+ }
out_unlock:
if (attr->na_seclabel && attr->na_seclabel->len)
Does that seem reasonable?
Thanks,
NeilBrown
