Bug 692968

Summary:	NFS Permission Denied Errors
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5	Reporter:	Matthew Miller <mattdm>
Component:	nfs-utils	Assignee:	Steve Dickson <steved>
Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX	QA Contact:	Filesystem QE <fs-qe>
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	5.5	CC:	jlayton, lars, vanmeeuwen+fedora
Target Milestone:	rc
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	All
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:	264661	Environment:
Last Closed:	2014-02-05 21:47:27 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:
Bug Depends On:	264661
Bug Blocks:

Description Matthew Miller 2011-04-01 20:18:04 UTC

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #264661 +++


--- Additional comment from lars on 2011-04-01 16:13:45 EDT ---

We've just run into this problem on two of our RHEL5.5 systems.  That is, systems that had previously been exporting NFS filesystems without a problem suddenly started reporting "permission denied" despite entries like this in /etc/exports:

  /mnt/somefilesystem *(ro)

The solution was to manually mount /proc/fs/nfsd.  

/etc/modprobe.d/modprobe.conf.dist is unmodified from the stock configuration and includes the necessary install/remove rules:

  install nfsd /sbin/modprobe --first-time --ignore-install nfsd && { /bin/mount -t nfsd nfsd /proc/fs/nfsd > /dev/null 2>&1 || :; }
  remove nfsd { /bin/umount /proc/fs/nfsd > /dev/null 2>&1 || :; } ; /sbin/modprobe -r --first-time --ignore-remove nfsd

This happened on unrelated systems, maintained by two distinct groups of people.

Since the mount operation is idempotent (if the filesystem is already mounted, running "mount -t nfsd nfsd /proc/fs/nfsd" simply reports an error), we've simply made this part of the NFS startup script.  It seems that this might be a good idea in general.

Comment 1 Steve Dickson 2011-09-30 20:53:01 UTC

Could this possibly be a Selinux issue? Does setenfore 0 make the problem go away?

Comment 2 Matthew Miller 2011-10-01 00:53:00 UTC

Pretty sure that SELinux was off on the systems. Lars, do you remember which machines these were?

Comment 6 RHEL Program Management 2014-01-29 10:38:07 UTC

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

Comment 7 RHEL Program Management 2014-02-05 21:47:27 UTC

Development Management has reviewed and declined this request.
You may appeal this decision by reopening this request.