From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:1034 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752759Ab1F0Qgc (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jun 2011 12:36:32 -0400 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p5RGaVJj004803 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 12:36:31 -0400 Message-ID: <4E08B18E.20104@RedHat.com> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 12:36:30 -0400 From: Steve Dickson To: "J. Bruce Fields" CC: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] mountd: don't automatically add subexports to kernel cache References: <1308063492-30103-1-git-send-email-bfields@redhat.com> <1308063492-30103-5-git-send-email-bfields@redhat.com> <4E026D08.5070309@RedHat.com> <20110622223412.GB7395@pad.home.fieldses.org> In-Reply-To: <20110622223412.GB7395@pad.home.fieldses.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 On 06/22/2011 06:34 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 06:30:32PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote: >> Hey Bruce, >> >> This patch breaks cross mounts... Here is my set up >> >> /home/fs1 two different file systems: >> >> Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on >> /dev/mapper/VolGroup00-HomeDirs >> 15236080 9439036 5010612 66% /home >> RedHat# df /home/fs1 >> Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on >> /dev/mapper/VolGroup00-FS1 >> 10321208 154468 9642452 2% /home/fs1 >> >> The export is: >> /home *(rw,crossmnt,nohide,sec=sys:krb5:krb5i:krb5p) >> >> when I mount from a f15 client >> mount -v -o v3 redhat:/home/fs1/tmp/tophat /mnt/tmp >> I get: >> mount.nfs: mount(2): Stale NFS file handle >> >> When I revert the patch, the mount works. > > Oh, crap, I didn't check v3. And, OK, it makes sense that v3 might need > this. > >> Unfortunately I'm going to be taking the next few days off >> so I am not going be able to debug this... So I'm going to >> wait on the entire patch series until we can sort this out... > > No problem. But if you want to apply the rest of the series and drop > just this one patch, that would be fine too. (That's probably what will > end up being the fix anyway.) Ok... I just committed the first three patches of this series... steved.