Re: linux-3.14 nfsd regression

["J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@redhat.com>]

On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 01:51:06PM -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> On 14-04-03 01:16 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 12:33:55PM -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> >> This commit from linux-3.14 breaks our NFS-root clients here:
> >>
> >> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=6e14b46b91fee8a049b0940333ce13a820beaaa5
> >>
> >>
> >> - *p++ = htonl((u32) stat->mode);
> >> + *p++ = htonl((u32) (stat->mode & S_IALLUGO));
> >>
> >>
> >> Reverting the one-liner above (on the server) fixes it for us,
> >> as does reverting back to linux-3.13.8 on the server.
> >>
> >> The NFS-root clients are on PowerPC (big-endian) architecture,
> >> running linux-3.12.16. The NFS server is on an Intel PC running linux-3.14.
> >>
> >> ACL is completely disabled on server and client,
> >> and we're using NFSv2/v3.  No support for v4.
> >>
> >> I instrumented the function to see what other bits were being cleared
> >> by the (stat->mode & S_IALLUGO) masking.  The results are attached.
> > 
> > Hm, it sounds like a bug in the client if it's depending on those high
> > bits.
> 
> But only for mounting / starting up from the nfsroot, it seems.
> I wonder if there's an unusual code path for that in there?
> The regular stuff looks mostly fine:
> 
>         p = xdr_decode_ftype3(p, &fmode);
>         fattr->mode = (be32_to_cpup(p++) & ~S_IFMT) | fmode;

Hm, but that's in nfs3xdr.c; in nfs2xdr.c we have just

	fattr->mode = be32_to_cpup(p+);

and NFSv2 is the default for nfsroot.  Do you have some reason to
believe you're not using NFSv2?

--b.

> 
> Except perhaps that second line ought to use the same mask
> as the server side is using, just in case there are some other
> stray high (higher than S_IFMT) bits in there now/someday.
> 
> > The original behavior was in practice harmless and changing it broke
> > something, so I think we should definitely just revert this patch.
> 
> Yup.  Who?
> 
> > But the client may need fixing too.
> 
> Probably a good thing in the longer term, for better compatibility
> with non-Linux servers.  But we'll still have to keep the revert
> on the server (nfsd) code for backward compatibility, I think.
> 
> Cheers
> 
>