RFC 8881 explains the purpose of the write verifier this way:
> The final portion of the result is the field writeverf. This field
> is the write verifier and is a cookie that the client can use to
> determine whether a server has changed instance state (e.g., server
> restart) between a call to WRITE and a subsequent call to either
> WRITE or COMMIT.
But then it says:
> This cookie MUST be unchanged during a single instance of the
> NFSv4.1 server and MUST be unique between instances of the NFSv4.1
> server. If the cookie changes, then the client MUST assume that
> any data written with an UNSTABLE4 value for committed and an old
> writeverf in the reply has been lost and will need to be
> recovered.
RFC 1813 has similar language for NFSv3. NFSv2 does not have a write
verifier since it doesn't implement the COMMIT procedure.
Since commit 19e0663ff9bc ("nfsd: Ensure sampling of the write
verifier is atomic with the write"), the Linux NFS server has
returned a boot-time-based verifier for UNSTABLE WRITEs, but a zero
verifier for FILE_SYNC and DATA_SYNC WRITEs. FILE_SYNC and DATA_SYNC
WRITEs are not followed up with a COMMIT, so there's no need for
clients to compare verifiers for stable writes.
However, by returning a different verifier for stable and unstable
writes, the above commit puts the Linux NFS server a step farther
out of compliance with the first MUST above. At least one NFS client
(FreeBSD) noticed the difference, making this a potential
regression.
Reported-by: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nfs/YQXPR0101MB096857EEACF04A6DF1FC6D9BDD749@YQXPR0101MB0968.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM/T/
Fixes: 19e0663ff9bc ("nfsd: Ensure sampling of the write verifier is atomic with the write")
Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
f11ad7aa65