samba - Jan 2023 - oplocks, kernel oplocks, kernel share modes, .. - how it all works?

What Samba version is this? This:
> LEASE() 
... looks broken: the handle oplock/lease state claims to be a lease, 
which means the client didn't request an oplock but a lease which should 
not have happened in the first place, because the global leases 
capabiltiy is not signaled by the server when kernel oplocks are enabled.

I assume this is 4.17? That saw substantial changes in the core open 
handling, I'm worried that some of the subtle oplock/lease handling was 
broken by those changes.

-slow


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 840 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL:
<http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba/attachments/20230124/b298b96d/OpenPGP_signature.sig>

24.01.2023 20:22, Ralph Boehme via samba wrote:
> What Samba version is this? This:
> 
>> LEASE() 
> 
> ... looks broken: the handle oplock/lease state claims to be a lease, which
means the client didn't request an oplock but a lease which should not
> have happened in the first place, because the global leases capabiltiy is
not signaled by the server when kernel oplocks are enabled.
> 
> I assume this is 4.17? That saw substantial changes in the core open
handling, I'm worried that some of the subtle oplock/lease handling was
broken by
> those changes.
Yes this is 4.17[.4], the current stable (debian build of it).

I assumed LEASE() is okay because it is in fact SMB1 oplock, not a lease,
again as per your prior explanations.  As I wrote before, this LEASE()
appeared here (instead of LEASE(RH) etc) when I enabled kernel oplocks
(for this share anyway).

/mjt