Linux NFSv4 clients are getting (bad sequence-id error!)

[Ahmed Kamal]

Appreciating the fruitful discussion! Can someone please explain to me,
what would happen in the current situation (linux client doing this
skip-by-1 thing, and freebsd not doing it) ? What is the effect of that?
What do users see? Any chances of data loss?

Also, I find it strange that netapp have acknowledged this is a bug on
their side, which has been fixed since then!
I also find it strange that I'm the first to hit this :) Is no one running
nfs4 yet!

On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Rick Macklem <rmacklem at uoguelph.ca> wrote:

> Julian Elischer wrote:
> > On 7/2/15 9:09 AM, Rick Macklem wrote:
> > > I am going to post to nfsv4 at ietf.org to see what they say. Please
> > > let me know if Xin Li's patch resolves your problem, even though I
> > > don't believe it is correct except for the UINT32_MAX case. Good
> > > luck with it, rick
> > and please keep us all in the loop as to what they say!
> >
> > the general N+2 bit sounds like bullshit to me.. its always N+1 in a
> > number field that has a
> > bit of slack at wrap time (probably due to some ambiguity in the
> > original spec).
> >
> Actually, since N is the lock op already done, N + 1 is the next lock
> operation in order. Since lock ops need to be strictly ordered, allowing
> N + 2 (which means N + 2 would be done before N + 1) makes no sense.
>
> I think the author of the RFC meant that N + 2 or greater fails, but it
> was poorly worded.
>
> I will pass along whatever I get from nfsv4 at ietf.org. (There is an archive
> of it somewhere, but I can't remember where.;-)
>
> rick
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-fs at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>