Description of problem: While reading the directory, Linux NFS readdirplus procedure call also includes an optimization logic to build the file handles for all the files within that directory based on the directory contents at the same time. Unfortunately, GFS2 passes NFSD on-disk ino address (no_addr - the 2nd 64 bit of GFS ino structure) to NFS in readdirplus but expects formal inode number (the 1st 64 bits) in lookup code when filehandle is actually used. This causes a large portion of NFS lookup failure when these file handles are actually used. A very significant issues when running NFS with GFS2. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): ALL How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: Patch submitted to cluster-devel and is currently under discussion.
Patch and discussion thread archived at: https://www.redhat.com/archives/cluster-devel/2007-February/msg00109.html
We'll tentatively set aside no_formal_ino and make lookup code consistent with no_addr. Not sure whether we need a new bugzilla for not-NFS related changes ?
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.
Devel ACK for 5.1 - Would like to get the patch incorporated into an early 5.1 cycle kernel build.
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Kernel Team for inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release, and has moved to bugzilla status POST.
in 2.6.18-15.el5
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem described in this bug report. This report is therefore being closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information on the solution and/or where to find the updated files, please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report if the solution does not work for you. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2007-0959.html