Hi,
> - Are these two tests (Mutt + /tmp+aufs+nfs and Mutt + /tmp+nfs) done on
> the same kernel?
Yes. But I've tested with diferent kernel too.
> - Is CONFIG_SECURITY enabled for the kernel which is used for aufs test?
No it wasn't. Now I set it. Appears to solve the "delay" problem.
> > > I
Hi,
"Luis Carlos Erpen de Bona":
> > - Are these two tests (Mutt + /tmp+aufs+nfs and Mutt + /tmp+nfs) done on
> > the same kernel?
> Yes. But I've tested with diferent kernel too.
>
> > - Is CONFIG_SECURITY enabled for the kernel which is used for aufs test?
> No it wasn't. Now I set it. Appe
> "Luis Carlos Erpen de Bona":
> > > - Are these two tests (Mutt + /tmp+aufs+nfs and Mutt + /tmp+nfs) done on
> > > the same kernel?
> > Yes. But I've tested with diferent kernel too.
> >
> > > - Is CONFIG_SECURITY enabled for the kernel which is used for aufs test?
> > No it wasn't. Now I set
"Luis Carlos Erpen de Bona":
> The most strange is that the open file still okay until trying
> to remove the directory for .nfs. When issue "rm dir"
> the fd closes and the application (tail) dies.
I think I could find the bug in aufs.
Please apply this patch and let me know the result.
> I am afraid the behaviour of your tail(1) is related to the
> specification or feature of nfs, too.
> Will you try unmounting nfs after rmdir in 'Mutt + /tmp+nfs', and see
> what will happen? Although you may expect an error EBUSY, it may kill
> your tail process too. Please try it.
[EMAIL PROTEC
> I think I could find the bug in aufs.
Yes you found it.
Now it's working correctly!
Bona
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and
"Luis Carlos Erpen de Bona":
> Yes you found it.
>
> Now it's working correctly!
Glad to hear that.
Thank you for your bug report and repeated tests.
Junjiro Okajima
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still
