Bug 1160509 - bulk remove xattr should not fail if removexattr fails with ENOATTR/ENODATA
Summary: bulk remove xattr should not fail if removexattr fails with ENOATTR/ENODATA
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: GlusterFS
Classification: Community
Component: posix
Version: mainline
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Pranith Kumar K
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1162226 1163571
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2014-11-05 04:00 UTC by Pranith Kumar K
Modified: 2015-05-14 17:44 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version: glusterfs-3.7.0
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
: 1162226 1163571 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Last Closed: 2015-05-14 17:28:18 UTC
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Pranith Kumar K 2014-11-05 04:00:00 UTC
Description of problem:
    Bulk remove xattr is internal fop that comes from afr metadata
    self-heal. some xattrs like removexattr("posix.system_acl_access"),
    removes more than one xattr on the file so removexattr on these
    xattrs will fail with either ENODATA/ENOATTR. Since all afr cares
    is removing of these xattrs and if they are already deleted, it can
    treat it as success.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.

Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Comment 1 Anand Avati 2014-11-05 04:01:48 UTC
REVIEW: http://review.gluster.org/9049 (storage/posix: Treat ENODATA/ENOATTR as success in bulk removexattr) posted (#1) for review on master by Pranith Kumar Karampuri (pkarampu)

Comment 2 Anand Avati 2014-11-05 16:33:29 UTC
REVIEW: http://review.gluster.org/9049 (storage/posix: Treat ENODATA/ENOATTR as success in bulk removexattr) posted (#2) for review on master by Pranith Kumar Karampuri (pkarampu)

Comment 3 Anand Avati 2014-11-06 05:42:56 UTC
COMMIT: http://review.gluster.org/9049 committed in master by Vijay Bellur (vbellur) 
------
commit b42255e87a06679b803e6bd83d02465d82c357b6
Author: Pranith Kumar K <pkarampu>
Date:   Wed Nov 5 09:04:50 2014 +0530

    storage/posix: Treat ENODATA/ENOATTR as success in bulk removexattr
    
    Bulk remove xattr is internal fop in gluster. Some of the xattrs may have
    special behavior. Ex: removexattr("posix.system_acl_access"), removes more than
    one xattr on the file that could be present in the bulk-removal request.
    Removexattr of these deleted xattrs will fail with either ENODATA/ENOATTR.
    Since all this fop cares is removal of the xattrs in bulk-remove request and
    if they are already deleted, it can be treated as success.
    
    Change-Id: Id8f2a39b68ab763ec8b04cb71b47977647f22da4
    BUG: 1160509
    Signed-off-by: Pranith Kumar K <pkarampu>
    Reviewed-on: http://review.gluster.org/9049
    Reviewed-by: Shyamsundar Ranganathan <srangana>
    Tested-by: Gluster Build System <jenkins.com>
    Reviewed-by: Vijay Bellur <vbellur>

Comment 4 Niels de Vos 2015-05-14 17:28:18 UTC
This bug is getting closed because a release has been made available that should address the reported issue. In case the problem is still not fixed with glusterfs-3.7.0, please open a new bug report.

glusterfs-3.7.0 has been announced on the Gluster mailinglists [1], packages for several distributions should become available in the near future. Keep an eye on the Gluster Users mailinglist [2] and the update infrastructure for your distribution.

[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.devel/10939
[2] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.user

Comment 5 Niels de Vos 2015-05-14 17:35:41 UTC
This bug is getting closed because a release has been made available that should address the reported issue. In case the problem is still not fixed with glusterfs-3.7.0, please open a new bug report.

glusterfs-3.7.0 has been announced on the Gluster mailinglists [1], packages for several distributions should become available in the near future. Keep an eye on the Gluster Users mailinglist [2] and the update infrastructure for your distribution.

[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.devel/10939
[2] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.user

Comment 6 Niels de Vos 2015-05-14 17:38:03 UTC
This bug is getting closed because a release has been made available that should address the reported issue. In case the problem is still not fixed with glusterfs-3.7.0, please open a new bug report.

glusterfs-3.7.0 has been announced on the Gluster mailinglists [1], packages for several distributions should become available in the near future. Keep an eye on the Gluster Users mailinglist [2] and the update infrastructure for your distribution.

[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.devel/10939
[2] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.user

Comment 7 Niels de Vos 2015-05-14 17:44:36 UTC
This bug is getting closed because a release has been made available that should address the reported issue. In case the problem is still not fixed with glusterfs-3.7.0, please open a new bug report.

glusterfs-3.7.0 has been announced on the Gluster mailinglists [1], packages for several distributions should become available in the near future. Keep an eye on the Gluster Users mailinglist [2] and the update infrastructure for your distribution.

[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.devel/10939
[2] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.user


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.