Project

General

Profile

Bug #37547

client: fix failure in quota size limitation when using samba

Added by tang junhui 9 months ago. Updated 6 months ago.

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Category:
Correctness/Safety
Target version:
Start date:
12/07/2018
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Source:
Community (dev)
Tags:
Backport:
mimic,luminous
Regression:
No
Severity:
3 - minor
Reviewed:
Affected Versions:
ceph-qa-suite:
Component(FS):
Client
Labels (FS):
Pull request ID:

Description

In samba, Client::_write may be called with the offset a
negative number, and use the f->pos as the real write offset,
in such condition, quota size can not limite the writes
enven it exceeds the size limitation.


Related issues

Copied to fs - Backport #37695: mimic: client: fix failure in quota size limitation when using samba Resolved
Copied to fs - Backport #37696: luminous: client: fix failure in quota size limitation when using samba Rejected

History

#1 Updated by Greg Farnum 9 months ago

  • Project changed from Ceph to fs
  • Component(FS) Samba VFS added

#2 Updated by Patrick Donnelly 8 months ago

  • Category set to Correctness/Safety
  • Assignee set to tang junhui
  • Target version set to v14.0.0
  • Source set to Community (dev)
  • Backport set to mimic,luminous
  • Pull request ID set to 25110
  • Component(FS) Client added
  • Component(FS) deleted (Samba VFS)

#3 Updated by Patrick Donnelly 8 months ago

  • Status changed from New to Need Review

#4 Updated by Patrick Donnelly 8 months ago

  • Description updated (diff)

#5 Updated by Patrick Donnelly 8 months ago

  • Status changed from Need Review to Pending Backport

#6 Updated by Nathan Cutler 8 months ago

  • Copied to Backport #37695: mimic: client: fix failure in quota size limitation when using samba added

#7 Updated by Nathan Cutler 8 months ago

  • Copied to Backport #37696: luminous: client: fix failure in quota size limitation when using samba added

#8 Updated by Nathan Cutler 6 months ago

@Patrick - Jos reports the luminous backport is non-trivial. Do we really need it?

#9 Updated by Patrick Donnelly 6 months ago

  • Status changed from Pending Backport to Resolved

Nathan Cutler wrote:

@Patrick - Jos reports the luminous backport is non-trivial. Do we really need it?

No we don't. Marking this resolved.

Also available in: Atom PDF