Oups, sorry:
Linux shrek 2.4.13-ac7 #6 SMP Son Dez 2 20:02:04 CET 2001 i686 unknown
(on patches, IIRC)
>
> > After removing this symlink (within the server), ls is OK
> > within the client. Trying to copy servers /etc/ou.conf file to
> > /usr/share/openuniverse within the client, cp complains about
Oups, correction: /usr/share/openuniverse/conf
> > to many levels of symlinks?!? (/usr is shared)
>
> That can happen, yes. The symlink is still in the dcache, and so the
> VFS thinks that we want to open whatever it is that the symlink is
> pointing to (not the symlink itself). For this reason, less strict
> checking is performed, and so the client does not immediately see the
> change.
Shouldn't the client invalidate the dcache entry some time?
Now, 5 hours later, the dcache entry isn't invalidated, yet.
I think, this is a thinko. I'm not familiar with nfs internals,
but have done stuff like this before (anybody remember BioNet?).
Please try this:
shrek is the server, elfe the client
/raid is shared (reiserfs, no raid), /tmp isn't
shrek:/raid/tmp# touch /tmp/huhu
shrek:/raid/tmp# ln -s /tmp/huhu
shrek:/raid/tmp# l
total 1
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 55 Jan 11 20:07 ./
drwxr-xr-x 9 root root 218 Jan 11 20:06 ../
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 9 Jan 11 20:07 huhu -> /tmp/huhu
elfe:/raid/tmp# echo "huhu" > /tmp/huhu
elfe:/raid/tmp# l
insgesamt 1
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 55 11. Jan 20:07 ./
drwxr-xr-x 9 root root 218 11. Jan 20:06 ../
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 9 11. Jan 20:07 huhu -> /tmp/huhu
elfe:/raid/tmp# cat huhu
huhu
shrek:/raid/tmp# rm huhu
elfe:/raid/tmp# l
insgesamt 1
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 35 11. Jan 20:07 ./
drwxr-xr-x 9 root root 218 11. Jan 20:06 ../
elfe:/raid/tmp# touch huhu
elfe:/raid/tmp# l
ls: huhu: Eingabe-/Ausgabefehler
insgesamt 1
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 55 11. Jan 20:08 ./
drwxr-xr-x 9 root root 218 11. Jan 20:06 ../
Pretty simple. Can you reproduce this?
> If, however, you had first done 'ls -l' or something that tries to
> read the symlink itself, more strict revalidation checks are
> performed, and the stale dentry would have been detected.
Not sure.
> I can tighten the checks on this sort of thing a bit, but if so, it
> needs to be done carefully. It is important to make sure that
> operations like
> 'ls /usr/lib/*'
> (in which you want the system to repeatedly look up the same path) are
> efficient by caching the '/usr/lib' bit even if that /usr/lib is a
> symlink.
> Of course every time we do open("/usr/lib/libc.so"), we *do* want to
> make sure that we perform strict checks when we do the lookup of the
> last element of the path (on the actual file "libc.so").
>
> Cheers,
> Trond
Thank for your patience,
Hans-Peter
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/