linux-kernel - Re: NFS regression in v3.5-rc1: mount.nfs yells about incorrect mount option

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]

Message-ID: <20120608133317.GW12795@8bytes.org>
Date:	Fri, 8 Jun 2012 15:33:17 +0200
From:	Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
To:	Bryan Schumaker <bjschuma@...app.com>
Cc:	Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>,
	linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: NFS regression in v3.5-rc1: mount.nfs yells about incorrect
 mount option

On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 09:20:02AM -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
> On 06/08/2012 09:03 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 11:54:24AM -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
> >> On 06/07/2012 11:50 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> >>> mount -o nfsvers=3 ...
> >>
> >> What about `mount -o vers=4 ...`?  I'm compiling a kernel right now to
> >> see if I can reproduce this, what NFS .config options do you have set?
> >> (`cat .config | grep CONFIG_NFS_` should be good enough).
> > 
> > Okay, I tracked it down somewhat. The problem is that the nfs-version
> > is not set in my case so that data->version in nfs_init_server is 0. The
> > function returns -EPROTONOSUPPORT in this case which causes the mount
> > to fail. The evil commit is db8333519 and reverting it fixes the issue
> > for me. Patch attached.
> 
> Thanks!  I wasn't able to reproduce this on Ubuntu 12.04, so now I'm
> setting up 10.04 to see if that makes a difference.  I'd like to
> understand what's going on (and why my other patch didn't fix this
> problem) before reverting.

Your other patch only touched the nfs4 path, but in my setup nfs3 was in
use. Therefore the patch didn't help. I just figured out that
nfs_fs_mount is shared between nfs23 and nfs4, so the first patch
probably breaks nfs4. I send another one which takes this into account.

Regards,

	Joerg


--
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/