From: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@canonical.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: al viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "__d_unalias() should refuse to move mountpoints"
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:04:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <506173A6.2050705@canonical.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8db34325-e8e4-4e24-85dd-c8951769e2b6@email.android.com>
Hey,
Op 25-09-12 09:05, Eric W. Biederman schreef:
> Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@canonical.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>>
>> Op 25-09-12 05:39, Eric W. Biederman schreef:
>>> Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@canonical.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> This reverts commit ee3efa91e240f513898050ef305a49a653c8ed90.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@canonical.com>
>>>>
>>>> My thread about the regression seemed to have been ignored, so I can
>> only
>>>> conclude nobody objects against a full revert of this patch.
>>>>
>>>> My testcase is simply booting through netboot with / and ~/nfs as
>> separate
>>>> nfs filesystems, then doing 'ls ~/nfs' followed by 'ls ~' in a
>> gnome-terminal
>>>> window, then I get:
>>> Do I read your description correctly: Without using a bind mount you
>>> have the same nfs filesystem mounted on / and on ~/nfs?
>>>
>>> Something is definitely off with your configuration but if to work
>> you
>>> need to move mount points around then that something seems much
>> deeper
>>> than the __d_unalias change.
>>>
>>> What filesystems do you have mounted where?
>>>
>> / is a nfs filesystem, ~/nfs is a different nfs filesystem.
> Are both filesystems on the same server?
>
> Are the two filesystems distinct filesystem on the server?
>
> Unless there is duplication of something somewhere the d_unalias code should not trigger.
They're both on the same physical filesystem on the server, but unique exports:
/home/mlankhorst/nfs *(no_subtree_check,insecure,rw,all_squash,anonuid=1000,anongid=1000)
/home/mlankhorst/kvm/quantal-amd64 *(no_subtree_check,insecure,rw,no_root_squash)
Rootfs is mounted by the kernel itself, I used a custom init script to mount /lib/modules
early on:
mount -t nfs -o nolock,vers=3 192.168.1.128:/home/mlankhorst/nfs /home/mlankhorst/nfs &&
mkdir -p /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/kernel &&
mount --bind /home/mlankhorst/nfs/linux /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/kernel &&
([ -f /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/modules.symbols ] || depmod)
exec /sbin/init
>> Just doing
>> ls / is enough
>> to make all filesystems mounted on / return -EBUSY and disappear.
>>
>> I also have a subdir of ~/nfs/ bind mounted to /lib/modules/$(uname
>> -r)/kernel
>> for easy debugging so just doing 'make' in the kernel tree is enough to
>> get the
>> new modules + bzImage, but I don't know if it is a factor in
>> reproducing this bug
>> or not.
> Unlikely. But interesting. It at least fits the criteria of showing up to different places. It should not be enough for d_materialise uniqe.
>
Either way until the root cause is found could this patch be reverted?
~Maarten
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-25 9:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-24 17:45 [PATCH] Revert "__d_unalias() should refuse to move mountpoints" Maarten Lankhorst
2012-09-25 3:39 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-09-25 6:42 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2012-09-25 7:05 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-09-25 9:04 ` Maarten Lankhorst [this message]
2012-09-25 10:42 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-09-25 11:03 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2012-09-25 11:29 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-09-25 11:59 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2012-10-12 13:25 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2012-11-29 20:06 ` Al Viro
2012-11-29 20:53 ` Al Viro
2012-11-29 21:30 ` Al Viro
2012-11-29 22:09 ` Al Viro
2012-12-04 10:33 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2012-12-04 10:37 ` Maarten Lankhorst
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=506173A6.2050705@canonical.com \
--to=maarten.lankhorst@canonical.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox