From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6700FC433F5 for ; Wed, 2 Mar 2022 22:26:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232856AbiCBW04 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2022 17:26:56 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46978 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230344AbiCBW0z (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2022 17:26:55 -0500 Received: from mail-qt1-x836.google.com (mail-qt1-x836.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::836]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 347267807D for ; Wed, 2 Mar 2022 14:26:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qt1-x836.google.com with SMTP id bc10so3053857qtb.5 for ; Wed, 02 Mar 2022 14:26:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=toxicpanda-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=jrfHaieIrrnkEMFMMnMrlJtDDEUiIE870C40v9q8pok=; b=WuiWBeDQEirv15kTs9RA62KsWALm8MYwiaCU7QYBjf4PRzgOBrqM7hDU63CTDkZtN3 u6ebE4e5G2xUnhEkMWJmQCSvUqC8osmDr5JCw3eCd8xt1Xiy/Y5Y2mAXVitBEJLaVFdN C4P3EUjvgGTs7W9o/uHiKBJUTx9hRKAIMDwHQJgr/AH0rPH80/RO9yoljHErwsfGx2Ki 1s0sLazWI3rlq18VzaRUpqgLHFAzJFOEjDt6LoGjz05tCgjrVt8kdQa5YkQmx0gp/zp/ PBpoeS2yNWsWBXz1SuVAnra5xg6FxZLzfxUaWGDOC2UARlxfYTPA+yHE/mznmEVbVQSr h9YA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=jrfHaieIrrnkEMFMMnMrlJtDDEUiIE870C40v9q8pok=; b=rnaDyPuFRtqeA9INx+fqIW/b2Z+yXE3fekqllmZFrVK3qKJ8dRjY3e8vXgrXBPq1I8 qEIdHKSXdaPG3UVTT6OTRm0b/b4Mjv6NTSsmGV9zXckPnqsNjAeGDUsN8NZrPmfN8I/R /z/9iie0kpz9KD3ZVxrIqvEMfXeqKJl/jZ9WFG6EtOUEkTcpjczB5wouP2HnfvfBbn6Q t7ABgRqPvzVE3hG3ZjCn6osatR8ChHyr1c4fcxi98UoVJGqz6ZpI6dqYstp2g37Dwc+J wn5Fy4JqoAUJuD19Zf/f1tOoAEIaErZmkjcrvd55TXIknWQU8DdY0YsAkp9tW2d+Kvkj beoQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5308VcGF3keo5bkXOF66pWwwK2t/u5Pdj6lohXFaaS1jXEstVZpc L1AfDxkShndYhxOaEwZuy/cJYAM6Rtmj4+eE X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzUVs7Eox6/O7D6zrCLCdS/JSuS6iy9mNOaEEZnXfUlxlyy1IPok6gHOdjXLMAmua8/mhK9bg== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5cc9:0:b0:2de:8838:5888 with SMTP id s9-20020ac85cc9000000b002de88385888mr26116071qta.370.1646259970183; Wed, 02 Mar 2022 14:26:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (cpe-174-109-172-136.nc.res.rr.com. [174.109.172.136]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n13-20020ac85b4d000000b002de6fe91d2fsm180318qtw.68.2022.03.02.14.26.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 02 Mar 2022 14:26:09 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2022 17:26:08 -0500 From: Josef Bacik To: "J. Bruce Fields" Cc: linux-fsdevel , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, Chuck Lever Subject: Re: nfs generic/373 failure after "fs: allow cross-vfsmount reflink/dedupe" Message-ID: References: <20220301184221.371853-1-amir73il@gmail.com> <20220302065952.GE3927073@dread.disaster.area> <20220302082658.GF3927073@dread.disaster.area> <20220302211226.GG3927073@dread.disaster.area> <20220302220450.GD10757@fieldses.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220302220450.GD10757@fieldses.org> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 05:04:50PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > I started seeing generic/373 fail on recent linux-next in NFS testing. > > Bisect lands it on aaf40970b1d0 "fs: allow cross-vfsmount > reflink/dedupe". > > The test fails because a clone between two mounts is expected to fail, > and no longer does. > > In my setup both mounts are nfs mounts. They are mounts of different > exports, and the exports are exports of different filesystems. So it > does make sense that the clone should fail. > > I see the NFS client send a CLONE rpc to the server, and the server > return success. That seems wrong. > > Both exported filesystems are xfs, and from the code it looks like the > server calls vfs_clone_file_range(), which ends up calling > xfs_file_remap_range(). > > Are we missing a check now in that xfs case? > > I haven't looked any more closely at what's going on, so I could be > missing something. > Yeah there's a few fstests that test this functionality that need to be removed, I have patches pending for this in our fstests staging tree (since we run fstests nightly on our tree) https://github.com/btrfs/fstests/tree/staging Right now the patches just remove the tests from auto since that's what we run, I'll remove them properly once the patch lands in linus. Thanks, Josef