Re: mkstemp fails on cifs linux-2.6.31-rc1 / samba-3.3.6

Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.file-systems.cifs
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 13:00 +0200, Wilhelm Meier wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I made a simple test with cifs in linux-2.6.31-rc1 to see if the so called 
> kmail-problem (cifs-user-homes are totally unusable for kmail-mail-cache) 
> still remains. Than I ran into a strange problem using "sed -i <command> <file-
> on-cifs>". "sed" uses mkstemp libc-funktion and fails with EEXIST, writing 
> therefore tons of files onto the cifs-share.
> 
> You can reproduce it with:
> 
> strace mktemp -p . abcXXXXXX 2>&1 | more
> 
> giving
> 
> stat64(".", {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0700, st_size=0, ...}) = 0
> open("./abcUJcKWM", O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0600) = -1 EEXIST (File exists)
> stat64(".", {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0700, st_size=0, ...}) = 0
> open("./abcUGJaiA", O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0600) = -1 EEXIST (File exists)
> stat64(".", {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0700, st_size=0, ...}) = 0
> open("./abcWfKacs", O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0600) = -1 EEXIST (File exists)
> stat64(".", {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0700, st_size=0, ...}) = 0
> open("./abcBaGjWM", O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0600) = -1 EEXIST (File exists)
> 
> This is the same on 2.6.31-rc1-git6.
> 
> This is not the case in 2.6.26-2-vserver-686 (debian).
> 
> The Samba-Server is lenny with samba-enterprise:
> kmux-fs:/# dpkg -l | grep samba
> ii  sernet-samba                    3.3.6-24                 a LanManager-like 
> file and printer server fo
> ii  sernet-samba-common             3.3.6-24                 Samba common files 
> used by both the server a
> ii  sernet-samba-keyring            1.1                      GnuPG archive 
> keys of the SerNet Samba archi
> 
> If I change Samba to the lenny-version
> 
> ii  samba                           2:3.2.5-4lenny6          a LanManager-like 
> file and printer server fo
> ii  samba-common                    2:3.2.5-4lenny6          Samba common files 
> used by both the server a
> 
> the described test-case is fine.
> 
> 

I can reproduce this too.

Looks like another regression from the create-on-lookup patches. I
commented the relevant chunk out of cifs_lookup and that fixes the
issue.

Shirish, thoughts?

-- 
Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.