Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.kernel > #67310
| Path | csiph.com!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod |
|---|---|
| From | Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> |
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.bugs.dist, linux.debian.kernel |
| Subject | Bug#962254: Umask ignored when mounting NFSv4.2 share of an exported Filesystem with noacl (was: Re: Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2) |
| Date | Mon, 15 Jun 2020 21:00:02 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <Ai2uS-2IP-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <AedoR-7Uq-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <AeekV-8tp-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <AedoR-7Uq-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <Aep6F-7Oh-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <Aepq1-7Uz-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <AgE1z-XY-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <AhdVn-5Re-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <Ahjo5-Jn-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <AhYUi-Kt-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <AedoR-7Uq-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <AhYUi-Kt-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| X-Original-To | "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@redhat.com> |
| X-Mailbox-Line | From debian-bugs-dist-request@lists.debian.org Mon Jun 15 18:57:11 2020 |
| Old-Return-Path | <debbugs@buxtehude.debian.org> |
| X-Spam-Flag | NO |
| X-Spam-Score | -0.5 |
| Reply-To | Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org>, 962254@bugs.debian.org |
| Original-Sender | Salvatore Bonaccorso <salvatore.bonaccorso@gmail.com> |
| Resent-To | debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org |
| Resent-Cc | Debian Kernel Team <debian-kernel@lists.debian.org> |
| X-Debian-Pr-Message | followup 962254 |
| X-Debian-Pr-Package | src:linux |
| X-Debian-Pr-Keywords | security |
| X-Debian-Pr-Source | linux |
| X-Spam-Bayes | score:0.0000 Tokens: new, 21; hammy, 150; neutral, 171; spammy, 0. spammytokens: hammytokens:0.000-+--H*F:U*carnil, 0.000-+--H*r:TLS1_3, 0.000-+--Hx-spam-relays-external:eldamar, 0.000-+--Hx-spam-relays-external:sk:80-218-, 0.000-+--H*rp:U*salvatore.bonaccorso |
| Dkim-Signature | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=jFWR4GWMFwIjjeSDQ+KIpHiNpC5sqk3sNtM8x1vASuc=; b=UgFbJCq7jOjH3ijdZaqBLjm/94BWAgcamJk/3bpFJuv8YrXp42hh/4aA/yCzp/zaJk xdlbQx+oqtgD2ydz647yFEWMyDptPW5lvsc3sKx5pteoWuM7q8DqhGVrn5oHbEGkrZl8 54w/V21t1cpKt63uF3ALgzpmRPcm2UnVcO+tUU2iQRpADPpeNfOmLuMzpUPyYdrV4e7d LZjv5YkreD8eZzZijvg5MWgQXgRWhiLKS4ALM6AZBX5O7cP1OOql/B9R54VvRam7GGvd f7KIygD+1R4VrkrodKDmX2i4GF44c1uP7Ns0eUYsGoOHFaLAP2Sl/OYXF48JdzEsqUoI I5aA== |
| X-Google-Dkim-Signature | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=jFWR4GWMFwIjjeSDQ+KIpHiNpC5sqk3sNtM8x1vASuc=; b=ccL4upuMESX8JhvnGbIIakdmgTIRCXVgl4F8CTeBd8GZykjYLg58wRvgecsAoLfkfR CZ5COsNz7/nah87Q7Us/OIRlCtbuKZ9FnDFY0Dv+PWke9Kja6OmdSuIH7+q6VRdJNaZC pyubJBJTmqtS1J7pSOG9A8j1t5LFmerHKJVV56vkJiPOv0Y+dkZEZ4TowkixWzKTfDv0 vtJ/njv684rFyanySphCftDuIT3eSbB1NPpfu4U3yJf6OykTrWNq1DP7MXxDYxFnmozK qjaYhPUpFJhRTS4lvhxB5r/vHM1qli1i5sV7G7whw42AoLS2BU4fKkS822GzTgYN4IYt TBYw== |
| X-Gm-Message-State | AOAM530N01YbUCnLK463yj9RQktTj45BZvNPFdpxV5+5YdjE+Ir5miB2 KNP1rxBytgM0S7KxSurP6Ek= |
| X-Google-SMTP-Source | ABdhPJxI2wluavmydq5P9ZQXPNnrICM0EybzJ5wG6wocDeYgRLY5y7Cn2KASekrcPRLLu2A4mwmDJA== |
| X-Received | by 2002:adf:ecc2:: with SMTP id s2mr33194597wro.60.1592247193102; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 11:53:13 -0700 (PDT) |
| Sender | robomod@news.nic.it |
| MIME-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
| Content-Disposition | inline |
| X-Debian-Message | from BTS |
| X-Mailing-List | <debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/1608604 |
| List-ID | <debian-bugs-dist.lists.debian.org> |
| List-URL | <https://lists.debian.org/debian-bugs-dist/> |
| Approved | robomod@news.nic.it |
| Lines | 61 |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
| X-Original-Cc | Elliott Mitchell <ehem+debian@m5p.com>, 962254@bugs.debian.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, agruenba@redhat.com |
| X-Original-Date | Mon, 15 Jun 2020 20:53:11 +0200 |
| X-Original-Message-ID | <20200615185311.GA702681@eldamar.local> |
| X-Original-References | <20200605051607.GA34405@mattapan.m5p.com> <20200605064426.GA1538868@eldamar.local> <20200605051607.GA34405@mattapan.m5p.com> <20200605174349.GA40135@mattapan.m5p.com> <20200605183631.GA1720057@eldamar.local> <20200611223711.GA37917@mattapan.m5p.com> <20200613125431.GA349352@eldamar.local> <20200613184527.GA54221@mattapan.m5p.com> <20200615145035.GA214986@pick.fieldses.org> <20200605051607.GA34405@mattapan.m5p.com> <20200615145035.GA214986@pick.fieldses.org> |
| X-Original-Sender | Salvatore Bonaccorso <salvatore.bonaccorso@gmail.com> |
| Xref | csiph.com linux.debian.bugs.dist:1013993 linux.debian.kernel:67310 |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
Show key headers only | View raw
Hi Bruce, On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 10:50:35AM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 11:45:27AM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote: > > I disagree with this assessment. All of the reporters have been using > > ZFS, but this could indicate an absence of testers using other > > filesystems. We need someone with a NFS server which has a 4.15+ kernel > > and uses a different filesystem which supports ACLs. > > Honestly I don't think I currently have a regression test for this so > it's possible I could have missed something upstream. I haven't seen > any reports, though.... > > ZFS's ACL implementation is very different from any in-tree > filesystem's, and given limited time, a filesystem with no prospect of > going upstream isn't going to get much attention, so, yes, I'd need to > see a reproducer on xfs or ext4 or something. I think the following is reproducible on a ext4 exported share (with underlying filesystem mounted with noacl to mimic the suspect from the reporter). I tested the same with an older kernel from Debian stretch (running 4.9.210-1+deb9u1) but this does not show the same behaviour. The current test system is running 5.6.14-2 Debian kernel (so 5.6.14). 1/ Create an ext4 filesystem: # mkfs.ext4 /dev/vdb1 2/ Mount the filesystem with noacl (to mimic the situation): /dev/vdb1 /srv/data ext4 defaults,noacl 0 0 root@nfs-test:~# mount | grep vdb1 /dev/vdb1 on /srv/data type ext4 (rw,relatime,noacl) 3/ Export with /srv/data 192.168.122.1/24(rw,sync,no_subtree_check,no_root_squash) 4/ Reproduce the issue root@nfs-test:~# mount -t nfs 192.168.122.150:/srv/data /mnt root@nfs-test:~# mkdir /mnt/foo && ls -ld /mnt/foo && rmdir /mnt/foo drwxrwxrwx 2 root root 4096 Jun 15 20:24 /mnt/foo root@nfs-test:~# mount | grep data /dev/vdb1 on /srv/data type ext4 (rw,relatime,noacl) 192.168.122.150:/srv/data on /mnt type nfs4 (rw,relatime,vers=4.2,rsize=524288,wsize=524288,namlen=255,hard,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=2,sec=sys,clientaddr=192.168.122.150,local_lock=none,addr=192.168.122.150) root@nfs-test:~# umount /mnt Looking at a wireshark captured sniff, the situation was the same as in the previous ZFS case, in the gettattr from the client and the server does indicate support for the new mode_umask. Then later in the CREATE operation, the client sets the mode_umask attribute, with mode part set to '0777' and umask to '022'. The mode replied is then as well '0777'. Notabene: if not mounting the filesystem with noacl, then there is no observed behaviour change here. Regards, Salvatore
Back to linux.debian.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2 Elliott Mitchell <ehem+debian@m5p.com> - 2020-06-05 07:50 +0200
Processed: Re: Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2 "Debian Bug Tracking System" <owner@bugs.debian.org> - 2020-06-05 08:50 +0200
Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2 Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2020-06-05 08:50 +0200
Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2 Elliott Mitchell <ehem+debian@m5p.com> - 2020-06-05 20:20 +0200
Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2 Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2020-06-05 20:40 +0200
Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2 Elliott Mitchell <ehem+debian@m5p.com> - 2020-06-06 00:40 +0200
Bug#934160: Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2 Elliott Mitchell <ehem+debian@m5p.com> - 2020-06-09 04:00 +0200
Processed: Re: Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2 "Debian Bug Tracking System" <owner@bugs.debian.org> - 2020-06-09 04:00 +0200
Bug#962254: Umask ignored when mounting NFSv4.2 share of an exported ZFS (with acltype=off) (was: Re: Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2) Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2020-06-13 15:00 +0200
Bug#962254: Umask ignored when mounting NFSv4.2 share of an exported ZFS (with acltype=off) (was: Re: Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2) "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@redhat.com> - 2020-06-15 17:10 +0200
Bug#962254: Umask ignored when mounting NFSv4.2 share of an exported Filesystem with noacl (was: Re: Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2) Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2020-06-15 21:00 +0200
Bug#962254: Umask ignored when mounting NFSv4.2 share of an exported Filesystem with noacl (was: Re: Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2) "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@redhat.com> - 2020-06-16 04:50 +0200
Bug#962254: Umask ignored when mounting NFSv4.2 share of an exported Filesystem with noacl (was: Re: Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2) Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2020-06-16 07:40 +0200
Bug#962254: Umask ignored when mounting NFSv4.2 share of an exported Filesystem with noacl (was: Re: Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2) Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2020-06-16 18:30 +0200
Bug#962254: Umask ignored when mounting NFSv4.2 share of an exported Filesystem with noacl (was: Re: Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2) "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@redhat.com> - 2020-06-17 03:10 +0200
Bug#962254: Umask ignored when mounting NFSv4.2 share of an exported Filesystem with noacl Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2020-06-17 07:10 +0200
Bug#962254: Umask ignored when mounting NFSv4.2 share of an exported Filesystem with noacl (was: Re: Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2) Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2020-06-16 07:40 +0200
Bug#962254: Umask ignored when mounting NFSv4.2 share of an exported Filesystem with noacl (was: Re: Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2) "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@redhat.com> - 2020-06-17 17:40 +0200
Bug#962254: Umask ignored when mounting NFSv4.2 share of an exported Filesystem with noacl (was: Re: Bug#962254: NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2) Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@redhat.com> - 2020-06-17 19:00 +0200
csiph-web