Re: [PATCH] nfs-utils: mount: really return from errno test

[Steve Dickson <SteveD-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

On 10/13/2011 01:54 PM, Chuck Lever wrote:
> 
> On Oct 13, 2011, at 12:59 PM, Steve Dickson wrote:
> 
>> Looking further into this issue, I noticed all the following 
>> mounts were successful.
>>
>> # mount -o v3 localhost:/home /mnt/home
>> # mount -o v4 localhost:/home /mnt/home
> 
> Does this actually change the NFS version in use for /mnt/home, or does the client recognize that this is the same server and export as an existing mount point, and share the cache and mount options?
Using wireshark, I verified that the version does indeed change...

> 
> If the mount options are the same, this is equivalent to
> 
> # mount -o v3 localhost:/home /mnt/home
> # mount -o v3 localhost:/home /mnt/home
In this case the second mount does fail with EBUSY..

steved.
> 
> And both mount requests should succeed.
> 
>> # mount -o v4 [fec0::2:5652:ff:fe20:8459]:/home /mnt/home
>> # mount -o v3 [fec0::2:5652:ff:fe20:8459]:/home /mnt/home
>>
>> which the mount point, /mnt/home is mounted 4 different times 
>> to the same server.
> 
> Assuming localhost is fec0::2:5652:ff:fe20:8459, this test allows you to mount the same server by an IPv4 and an IPv6 address onto the same local directory.  Why then does 744657's test case fail?
> 
>> Is by design or a real problem?
>> steved.
>>
>>
>> On 10/13/2011 12:34 PM, Steve Dickson wrote:
>>> Yeah... I believe its this one
>>>   https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=744657
>>>
>>> On 10/13/2011 10:53 AM, Chuck Lever wrote:
>>>> What was the presenting problem?  Is there a bugzilla report I can look at?
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 11, 2011, at 5:44 AM, Hamo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> We should only try next address family if we meet ECONNREFUSED or EHOSTUNREACH
>>>>> for v4 or ECONNREFUSED or EOPNOTSUPP or EHOSTUNREACH for v3v2.
>>>>> Before, only a break in swich can not make the program out of for loop.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yang Bai <hamo.by-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> utils/mount/stropts.c |    6 ++++--
>>>>> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/utils/mount/stropts.c b/utils/mount/stropts.c
>>>>> index 314a806..4032bf3 100644
>>>>> --- a/utils/mount/stropts.c
>>>>> +++ b/utils/mount/stropts.c
>>>>> @@ -665,9 +665,10 @@ static int nfs_try_mount_v3v2(struct nfsmount_info *mi)
>>>>> 		case EHOSTUNREACH:
>>>>> 			continue;
>>>>> 		default:
>>>>> -			break;
>>>>> +			goto out;
>>>>> 		}
>>>>> 	}
>>>>> +out:
>>>>> 	return ret;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -751,9 +752,10 @@ static int nfs_try_mount_v4(struct nfsmount_info *mi)
>>>>> 		case EHOSTUNREACH:
>>>>> 			continue;
>>>>> 		default:
>>>>> -			break;
>>>>> +			goto out;
>>>>> 		}
>>>>> 	}
>>>>> +out:
>>>>> 	return ret;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> 1.7.1
>>>>> --
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
>>>>> the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
>>>>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>>
>>> --
>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>>> the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
>>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html