From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wr1-f50.google.com (mail-wr1-f50.google.com [209.85.221.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 220451E1308 for ; Sat, 26 Apr 2025 20:17:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.221.50 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745698667; cv=none; b=f+a+71JKnuYUMxIdv45RtbOwMO8YQAeQiXQHd5Fd6/zPjQps3SxHRsS0pY1MWW8gT2C9Dvs5OWilRE45HvzzQYAPMkysre21KwwWLwb/sIS69Y+6HcY5EgzymkMZqad2q5PGU8dcO1FCP/o2Z5YVSj5CnkHk+CPBloGQaHGn0BI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745698667; c=relaxed/simple; bh=baTy+CRjFr9atA2o0vFk8tZAXPsxlLnGPe9/gvJstDY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=WTE8CLz4YAvfgJTEGis6jJWMJ2dRw02OHuSLnP6IUr3TPqCFlFHaTuC37ouahj1b+0s4mgNrwjVGxV8BCFdDqXsPVoTNHM0SSwmu26u2ShcVuEgKiUQrGtYF7zwDKurTxLLSbM82OVjvcwe1MWL3TBrq7bunPEkPnFSJUFHWhRU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=debian.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=WucHg92Y; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.221.50 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=debian.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="WucHg92Y" Received: by mail-wr1-f50.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-3913b539aabso1926479f8f.2 for ; Sat, 26 Apr 2025 13:17:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1745698663; x=1746303463; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=xKEM/y7M4LOZuWsNOEs+yu9ipSps8OF6zqHS5ZoQopE=; b=WucHg92Y3Lca/ltLEqbJLODMpC/6zMR5Q/ZTVvHUuVlxaTVUbD201Fs4SgOg+C5cdm Qj25Cv5RHwrZVZQl8gfZcM9pIP/TD3AjtrOnqk3o1twH/N7TBrg4ZSyKvuHIFzGSnRgg 6AmMl4UlqLRfxn5S75aEAEgVRL1ZLYL1Vy24JW2EP1aLcI4vFitE1gvqarckc2O5UYku pyZnI3G4dbI2NcvE/kXc9892c92xBUCUfBxrOoPI39MG/RY1ElNu8rLX9oMuvs6lr5V9 Q1VBb9360bGMAej3P/RoT0OA/cdE2NxBsDbTC4flCMVu4mpo3mxRPBztxhGdJfZ7/Rw2 iuHg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1745698663; x=1746303463; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:sender:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=xKEM/y7M4LOZuWsNOEs+yu9ipSps8OF6zqHS5ZoQopE=; b=oJzkqhQKsEZ9Qzdv+AFV5lgikfaqcasUbVpN47x25J1T78aZNL0YO+hNk4PT7h9uYc BBezK44tU8VoNua2aLBJV4r78jq12aqB8WoKx94esyzM3x0V3YFqMnxPFWD/Tx4nC3+g plctuuCbZ97x03Xe4qhL6yKe05JNCD4yeVCwqZucGgF6bi7c+oOkCEjQ/tGf8CnuUnXw i9aHNZwtStcsCbvOFPUa75bKyav672Ww7G2+DLxH29Ds7MHDC855APS05sHhbWjp9AxT eXv2rfLdLXn7C9R6jte8cJYawx2UfsNfftmU3hW0E1dgCjPWuD/6jXyE2Mw37qZFaG83 dvCg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWr0JPDDuxqowVlWa+fEnvLG4VbaUE/gnf24DH+Ldbj/sfvrPOyl/Fofs8nv/LGP3cANoqkempQJnA=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YztPqhrHL66aUREN7dFXmli6WyZgq8d33Knf/+WBJj4bDnz4OI9 teN/U0YjGwFUWW4hMNbwTFNZL9GIAmUoDIgY/S9/wYvwze+fBDlZ X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctBQpe72n3AUlnwHn7Zdbc7gpABRETFRgg/L/UzL1Fq0mLAZOoIG1JCQ3J1+lx QcQEEodiQBPQFN5oPaPEx+i74xQlBmZlyT8cKJbHLw2YPc+5z7Pvz2crsF7wBZxd1wFeEBGXNOT zb0D4Ez9ZwTgJ/1McDcQXO2bzFNDv2bgwrKyWW5OsGAB2spOsPXxQVmPNn+H1WminP+w2Mghysc YLnAjBpfsTI4Mdj92XpWkHXCcrm/dPKKfg7M7eZR0gklEiS/KG/E8NYMxsn67SJld9Bp5IQUr5y Wt6SU1nLhx6stc8ffgeUtS6ePK97sEM3OeeMbQajLnEI3bCMG3ws0NTydjOeR/HbE/1RcfeI1g= = X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHOkaftGjBLxYV42+A0J8lT57ZQ8dgM5ldCpBk2GAGiNpydf0VtX055W2iSJu4W4fqz/om++g== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:1a86:b0:391:49f6:dad4 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-3a07ab85d74mr2691046f8f.41.1745698662918; Sat, 26 Apr 2025 13:17:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eldamar.lan (c-82-192-244-13.customer.ggaweb.ch. [82.192.244.13]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-3a073e5c68esm6424643f8f.82.2025.04.26.13.17.40 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 26 Apr 2025 13:17:41 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Salvatore Bonaccorso Received: by eldamar.lan (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B3DCFBE2DE0; Sat, 26 Apr 2025 22:17:39 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2025 22:17:39 +0200 From: Salvatore Bonaccorso To: Jeff Layton Cc: Steve Dickson , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: nfsdctl: lockd configuration failure reported after updating to nfs-utils-2.8.3 Message-ID: References: <351c3498e26be45d139137dade13c4c63798f637.camel@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Hi Jeff, On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 08:49:36AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Sat, 2025-04-26 at 13:53 +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > > Hi Jeff, > > > > On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 06:55:42AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > > On Sat, 2025-04-26 at 10:12 +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > > > > > After updating in Debian nfs-utils to 2.8.3, a systemctl status > > > > nfs-server.service shows: > > > > > > > > nfsdctl: lockd configuration failure > > > > > > > > For reproducing the case the nfs.conf is kept to the default > > > > (commented) section. > > > > > > > > In Debian we do not use the system linux/lockd_netlink.h (where the > > > > changes only seem to have merged upstream in 6.15-rc1) and use the > > > > shipped copy in nfs-utils instead. > > > > > > > > I do not see problems with mounts, so I suspect the problem a user > > > > reported downstream in https://bugs.debian.org/1104096 is just > > > > cosmetical? > > > > > > > > nfsdctl nlm reports: > > > > > > > > nfsdctl: nfsd not found > > > > > > > > > > The errors are harmless. They just means that you're running a new > > > version of nfs-utils on top of an old kernel that doesn't have the > > > netlink control interfaces for knfsd. The systemd service will fall > > > back to starting the server with the legacy rpc.nfsd program if that > > > fails so everything should still work after that. > > > > Thanks for the confirmation. This aligns with what I found while > > experimenting, and yes for me all works still after that on the system > > with the exports. > > > > We are running 6.12.y in Debian trixie, but having 2.8.3 available > > already, so yes this has not the new interfaces. > > > > I wonder if you will still count that as regression as before in 2.8.2 > > a nfsdctl autostart would bring still up the nfsd's. > > > > With 2.8.2 and the 6.12.y kernel: > > > > root@sid:~# ps -C nfsd > > PID TTY TIME CMD > > 1842 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1843 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1844 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1845 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1846 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1847 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1848 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1849 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1850 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1851 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1852 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1853 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1854 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1855 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1856 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1857 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > root@sid:~# nfsdctl threads 0 > > root@sid:~# ps -C nfsd > > PID TTY TIME CMD > > root@sid:~# nfsdctl autostart > > root@sid:~# ps -C nfsd > > PID TTY TIME CMD > > 1874 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1875 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1876 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1877 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1878 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1879 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1880 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1881 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1882 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1883 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1884 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1885 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1886 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1887 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1888 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > 1889 ? 00:00:00 nfsd > > root@sid:~# uname -a > > Linux sid 6.12.25-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.12.25-1 (2025-04-25) x86_64 GNU/Linux > > root@sid:~# > > > > But after updating to 2.8.3 not. I wonder if the new interface can be > > made at runtime be used if a new enough kernel is available and > > otherwise fall back again to the 2.8.2 behaviour? > > > > What do you think? (I can as well ask the same just on the public > > thread if we want to have a public record on linux-nfs list). > > > > Sorry about the private reply. I just mashed the wrong button in my > MUA. Thanks for confirming, since nothing private will include the public list again to have the answer documented, thanks a lot again for your insights and explanation. > Actually this is probably a bugfix and the earlier autostart > functioning was a regression. The older nfsdctl version just ignored > [lockd] parameters in nfs.conf and wouldn't configure it properly. So > it started nfsd, but lockd wouldn't have gotten the right port settings > or the configured gracetime. Ok so likely not a regression from 2.8.2 -> 2.8.3 but actually a bugfix. > If you don't have any [lockd] settings, then nfsdctl should still work > with no fallback to rpc.nfsd. Actually it contains only the emtpy [lockd] stanza, but no explict settings so just the defaults. But you are correct, if even comment out the '[lockd]' from the default (as shipped upstream) then nfsdctl autostart works as expected. Thank you again for the swift replies, very much appreciated. Regards, Salvatore