Uploaded image for project: 'Lustre'
  1. Lustre
  2. LU-3826

copytool restore should set owner of volatile file before copy

Details

    • Bug
    • Resolution: Duplicate
    • Critical
    • None
    • Lustre 2.5.0
    • 3
    • 9872

    Description

      HSM restore fails for files not owned by root since the copytool does not set the ownership of the volatile file and layout swap required that the two files have the same ownership.

      Attachments

        Issue Links

          is related to

          Bug - A problem which impairs or prevents the functions of the product. LU-4293 lfs_migrate is failing with a volatile file Operation not permitted error

          • Major - Major loss of function.
          • Resolved

          Activity

            [LU-3826] copytool restore should set owner of volatile file before copy
            adilger Andreas Dilger made changes -
            Link New: This issue is related to LU-4293 [ LU-4293 ]
            jhammond John Hammond made changes -
            Status Original: Resolved [ 5 ] New: Closed [ 6 ]
            jhammond John Hammond made changes -
            Resolution New: Duplicate [ 3 ]
            Status Original: In Progress [ 3 ] New: Resolved [ 5 ]
            jhammond John Hammond added a comment -

            Folded into HSM timestamps and ownership issue LU-3811.

            jhammond John Hammond added a comment - Folded into HSM timestamps and ownership issue LU-3811 .
            jhammond John Hammond made changes -
            Status Original: Open [ 1 ] New: In Progress [ 3 ]
            jhammond John Hammond made changes -
            Assignee Original: WC Triage [ wc-triage ] New: John Hammond [ jhammond ]
            jhammond John Hammond added a comment -

            Please see http://review.whamcloud.com/7461.

            jhammond John Hammond added a comment - Please see http://review.whamcloud.com/7461 .
            jhammond John Hammond added a comment -

            Are we planning to support a non-root copytool? This is news to me. At very least it needs CAP_FOWNER, CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE and maybe some others.

            By original process, do you mean the copytool?

            jhammond John Hammond added a comment - Are we planning to support a non-root copytool? This is news to me. At very least it needs CAP_FOWNER, CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE and maybe some others. By original process, do you mean the copytool?
            adilger Andreas Dilger added a comment -

            The volatile file should be created by the MDS with the ownership of the original process as with any newly-created file, otherwise the non-root copytool will not have permission to chown() the file (nor should it be able to).

            adilger Andreas Dilger added a comment - The volatile file should be created by the MDS with the ownership of the original process as with any newly-created file, otherwise the non-root copytool will not have permission to chown() the file (nor should it be able to).
            adilger Andreas Dilger made changes -
            Priority Original: Minor [ 4 ] New: Critical [ 2 ]

            People

              jhammond John Hammond
              jhammond John Hammond
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              7 Start watching this issue

              Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: