[nfsv4] Asking for details about OPEN_DOWNGRADE

[Trond Myklebust]

On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 13:29 -0700, Mike Mackovitch wrote:

> By explicitly specifying that the behavior described above should not
> be allowed.  It is clear that the spec is NOT clear about that....
> otherwise, the spec wouldn't be getting "misinterpreted" by many people.
> 
> The text in the OPEN and OPEN_DOWNGRADE descriptions, as well as "Open
> Upgrade and Downgrade" sections, leads me (and others) to believe that
> the server only keeps one "OR"ed-together status for that owner and
> thus sending multiple, redundant OPEN requests (for that owner) was
> unnecessary.

I don't see how it can be interpreted that way. The texts in section
8.11 and in 14.2.19 both take care to talk about a _union_ of the OPEN
share and deny modes and proper subsets of that union.

The pynfs test suite will even check for this condition, so there is not
much excuse for claiming ignorance.

Trond