Re: BUG REPORT: kernel nfs between 2.4.19-pre2 (server) and 2.2.21-pre3 (client)

[Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>]

Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:

>On Mon, 11 Mar 2002 14:59:04 +0100
>Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>" " == Oleg Drokin <green@namesys.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>     > Trod, do you think that'll work or should some other non-ext2
>>     > fs be tried?
>>
>>Ext2 should work fine: I've never seen any problems such as that which
>>Stephan describes, and certainly not with 2.4.18 clients.
>>
>>In any case, any occurence of an ESTALE error *must* first have
>>originated from the server. The client itself cannot determine that a
>>filehandle is stale.
>>
>
>Next try:
>I have now in addition to the /backup and /mnt reiserfs exports created another
>ext2 export. First test case:
>mount /backup, mount the ext2 fs on /test, then mount /mnt, do i/o on /mnt and
>umount /mnt.
>After that everything works! /test works _and_ /backup works!
>
>Second test case: (server and client have several network cards, so I can mount
>on other ips as well)
>mount /backup, mount /mnt on ip1, mount /test on ip2 (from same server). do i/o
>on /mnt and umount /mnt.
>After that /test works, but/backup is stale.
>
>Conclusion: reiserfs has a problem being nfs-mounted as the only fs to a
>client. If you add another fs (here ext2) mount, then even reiserfs is happy.
>The problem is originated at the server side.
>
>Any ideas for a fix?
>
>Regards,
>Stephan
>
>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
>
Oleg will be back at work in 16 hours;-)

Hans