[Bugs] [Bug 1405147] glusterfs (posix-acl xlator layer) checks for " write permission" instead for "file owner" during open() when writing to a file

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1405147



--- Comment #7 from Josh Miller <unrtst at gmail.com> ---
FWIW, I've also seen this with multiple versions of nfs-ganesha with both the
XFS and GLUSTER FSAL's.

I used the following test:

echo "test" > file1; chmod 444 file1; cp file1 file2;
# that should work without error
# on error, we get: cp: closing `file2': Permission denied

Please note, this is not a timing issue with respect to when 'file1' was
created. The copy will fail on any existing files that are mode 444 (or 440 or
400). I have not tried to avoid directory operations to allow directory caches
to expire. That may be related, but I am not sure.

That fails on all of the following combos:

* nfs-ganesha 2.4.5 from CentOS Storage SIG (3.10), on CentOS 6, using GLUSTER
FSAL (gluster 3.10.11) [see note below though]
* nfs-ganesha 2.5.2 from CentOS Storage SIG (3.12), on CentOS 6, using GLUSTER
FSAL (gluster 3.12.3)
* nfs-ganesha 2.5.3 from CentOS Storage SIG (3.12), on CentOS 6, using GLUSTER
FSAL (gluster 3.12.4)
* nfs-ganesha 2.5.3 from CentOS Storage SIG (3.12), on CentOS 6, using GLUSTER
FSAL (gluster 3.12.5)
* nfs-ganesha 2.5.5 from CentOS Storage SIG (3.12), on CentOS 6, using GLUSTER
FSAL (gluster 3.12.6)
* nfs-ganesha 2.5.5 from CentOS Storage SIG (3.13), on CentOS 6, using GLUSTER
FSAL (gluster 3.13.2)
* nfs-ganesha 2.5.2 from CentOS Storage SIG (3.12), on CentOS 7, using XFS FSAL

Recently, this one DID work:
* nfs-ganesha 2.5.5 from CentOS Storage SIG (3.12), on CentOS 7, using XFS FSAL

Apparently, something was fixed in either the XFS FSAL or in ganesha itself.
Seeing that work prompted me to re-test with GLUSTER FSAL, but it still doesn't
work.


NOTE: Regarding ganesha 2.4.5, I'm fairly sure that did not work, but I didn't
spend much time on that version. I ran into a different bug (presented when cvs
prunes directories via "cvs up -P"), so I'm not 100% sure this bug was present
in 2.4.5 or not.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.