Re: Marking inodes as stale can be wrong

[Olaf Kirch <okir@suse.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 333 bytes --]

Here's a minimalistic fix. It may be better to change nfsd_acceptable
to return 0 on success and negative error code on error, but I'm not
sure this is really needed as long as the only acceptance test
in nfsd_acceptable is the subtree check.

Olaf
-- 
Olaf Kirch     |  The Hardware Gods hate me.
okir@suse.de   |
---------------+ 

[-- Attachment #2: subtreecheck-nostale.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 657 bytes --]

--- linux-2.6.5/fs/exportfs/expfs.c.nostale	2004-04-04 05:37:44.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6.5/fs/exportfs/expfs.c	2004-04-30 10:32:19.000000000 +0200
@@ -278,7 +278,15 @@
 
 	/* drat - I just cannot find anything acceptable */
 	dput(result);
-	return ERR_PTR(-ESTALE);
+
+	/* Originally, we would return ESTALE here. This is not
+	 * correct, however, as the file handle is valid; it just
+	 * failed our acceptance test.
+	 * This will lead to unexpected results in the client if
+	 * there are two processes accessing the same file; one
+	 * with proper permissions and one without.
+	 */
+	return ERR_PTR(-EACCES);
 
  err_target:
 	dput(target_dir);