NFSv4: Handle NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC outside of nfs4_handle_exception()
I only want to try other secflavors during an initial mount if
NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC is returned. nfs4_handle_exception() could
potentially map other errors to EPERM, so we should handle this
error specially for correctness.
Signed-off-by: Bryan Schumaker <bjschuma@netapp.com>
Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
index e7e2077..628e35f 100644
--- a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
+++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
@@ -2186,9 +2186,14 @@
struct nfs4_exception exception = { };
int err;
do {
- err = nfs4_handle_exception(server,
- _nfs4_lookup_root(server, fhandle, info),
- &exception);
+ err = _nfs4_lookup_root(server, fhandle, info);
+ switch (err) {
+ case 0:
+ case -NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC:
+ break;
+ default:
+ err = nfs4_handle_exception(server, err, &exception);
+ }
} while (exception.retry);
return err;
}
@@ -2221,10 +2226,19 @@
for (i = 0; i < len; i++) {
status = nfs4_lookup_root_sec(server, fhandle, info, flav_array[i]);
- if (status == -EPERM || status == -EACCES)
+ if (status == -NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC || status == -EACCES)
continue;
break;
}
+ /*
+ * -EACCESS could mean that the user doesn't have correct permissions
+ * to access the mount. It could also mean that we tried to mount
+ * with a gss auth flavor, but rpc.gssd isn't running. Either way,
+ * existing mount programs don't handle -EACCES very well so it should
+ * be mapped to -EPERM instead.
+ */
+ if (status == -EACCES)
+ status = -EPERM;
return status;
}
@@ -2235,7 +2249,11 @@
struct nfs_fsinfo *info)
{
int status = nfs4_lookup_root(server, fhandle, info);
- if ((status == -EPERM) && !(server->flags & NFS_MOUNT_SECFLAVOUR))
+ if ((status == -NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC) && !(server->flags & NFS_MOUNT_SECFLAVOUR))
+ /*
+ * A status of -NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC will be mapped to -EPERM
+ * by nfs4_map_errors() as this function exits.
+ */
status = nfs4_find_root_sec(server, fhandle, info);
if (status == 0)
status = nfs4_server_capabilities(server, fhandle);