Bug 486987

Summary:	cifs ignores fsync
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5	Reporter:	Robert Hell <robert.hell>
Component:	kernel	Assignee:	Jeff Layton <jlayton>
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Red Hat Kernel QE team <kernel-qe>
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	5.3	CC:	jlayton, steved
Target Milestone:	rc
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2009-04-22 18:57:08 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Robert Hell 2009-02-23 15:56:04 UTC

Description of problem:
In contrast to the now-obsolete smbfs, cifs ignores fsync to guarantee that all volatile data is written to stable storage on the server side, provided the server honors the request (which, to my knowledge, is true for Windows and Samba with 'strict sync' enabled).

A patch was submitted this week:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/797589

It would be nice to have fsync in cifs as soon as possible in RHEL.

Comment 1 Jeff Layton 2009-03-03 16:02:24 UTC

I've already got the patches for this in my test kernels:

http://people.redhat.com/jlayton

...if you have a place to do so, please test them and verify that they fix this problem for you.

Comment 2 RHEL Program Management 2009-03-03 16:13:19 UTC

This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red
Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release.  Product Management has requested
further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential
inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update release for currently deployed
products.  This request is not yet committed for inclusion in an Update
release.

Comment 3 Robert Hell 2009-03-08 17:37:17 UTC

I tested kernel-xen-2.6.18-133.el5.jtltest.66.x86_64.rpm from http://people.redhat.com/jlayton in our test environment. Looks very good - fsync seems to be sent by cifs client.

What are the next steps for this patch?

Comment 4 Jeff Layton 2009-03-08 19:48:18 UTC

I propose it internally (most likely as part of the larger CIFS update on which I'm working). Unless something goes wrong, this patch will most likely be in the RHEL 5.4 kernel.

Comment 6 Jeff Layton 2009-04-22 18:57:08 UTC


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 465143 ***