linux-kernel - Re: NFS regression? Odd delays and lockups accessing an NFS export.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 23 Sep 2008 13:03:45 -0400
From:	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
To:	Ian Campbell <ijc@...lion.org.uk>
Cc:	Tom Tucker <tom@...ngridcomputing.com>,
	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>,
	Grant Coady <gcoady.lk@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, neilb@...e.de,
	linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: NFS regression? Odd delays and lockups accessing an NFS export.

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 12:33:09PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 08:59 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > I've found that the problem was backported into the stable stream since
> > I cannot reproduce the issue with 2.6.26 but I can with 2.6.26.5. This
> > is quite useful since there are only 3 relevant looking changesets in
> > that range. I will bisect between these before confirming the culprit on
> > mainline.

Could you double-check that this is reproduceable with this commit
applied, and not reproduceable when it's not?

I suppose it's not impossible that this could be triggering the problem
in some very roundabout way, but it seems a bit out of left field--so I
wonder whether one of the bisection points could have gotten marked good
when it should have been bad, or vice-versa.

> It reports:
> 
>         daedfbe2a67628a40076a6c75fb945c60f608a2e is first bad commit
>         commit daedfbe2a67628a40076a6c75fb945c60f608a2e
>         Author: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>
>         Date:   Wed Jun 11 17:39:04 2008 -0400
>         
>             NFS: Ensure we zap only the access and acl caches when setting new acls
>             
>             commit f41f741838480aeaa3a189cff6e210503cf9c42d upstream
>             
>             ...and ensure that we obey the NFS_INO_INVALID_ACL flag when retrieving the
>             acls.
>             
>             Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>
>             Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
> 
> I'm just about to build f41f741838480aeaa3a189cff6e210503cf9c42d and the
> one before and try those.
> 
> I'm not using ACLs as far as I am aware.

I think commands like "ls" try to get posix acls these days, so it's
possible that the nfs3_proc_getacl code at least might be getting
called.  Why that would matter I can't see.

--b.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/