Dave Kleikamp wrote:
On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 07:11 +0800, Michael Deegan wrote:
Hi,
On Tue Aug 7 16:00:19 GMT 2007, Martin Koegler wrote:
A vanilla 2.6.22 kernel (SMP PREEMPT i686) produced the following messages,
while working with a CIFS mount point:
Aug 27 22:33:08 wibble
Dave Kleikamp wrote:
On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 07:11 +0800, Michael Deegan wrote:
Hi,
On Tue Aug 7 16:00:19 GMT 2007, Martin Koegler wrote:
A vanilla 2.6.22 kernel (SMP PREEMPT i686) produced the following messages,
while working with a CIFS mount point:
Aug 27 22:33:08 wibble
Shirish S Pargaonkar wrote:
When a session setup request is sent as an anonymous user (NUL user),
should/could there be
password associated with that?
Right now, sec=none option, will prompt you for a password.
And when we add code to retry session setup as anonymous user if the
first
Shirish S Pargaonkar wrote:
When a session setup request is sent as an anonymous user (NUL user),
should/could there be
password associated with that?
Right now, sec=none option, will prompt you for a password.
And when we add code to retry session setup as anonymous user if the
first
Jeff Layton wrote:
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 10:26:29AM -0500, Steve French (smfltc) wrote:
Jeff Layton wrote:
We had a customer report that attempting to make CIFS mount with a null
username (i.e. doing an anonymous mount) doesn't work. Looking through the
code, it looks like CIFS
Jeff Layton wrote:
We had a customer report that attempting to make CIFS mount with a null
username (i.e. doing an anonymous mount) doesn't work. Looking through the
code, it looks like CIFS expects a NULL username from userspace in order
to trigger an anonymous mount. The mount.cifs code
Jeff Layton wrote:
We had a customer report that attempting to make CIFS mount with a null
username (i.e. doing an anonymous mount) doesn't work. Looking through the
code, it looks like CIFS expects a NULL username from userspace in order
to trigger an anonymous mount. The mount.cifs code
Jeff Layton wrote:
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 10:26:29AM -0500, Steve French (smfltc) wrote:
Jeff Layton wrote:
We had a customer report that attempting to make CIFS mount with a null
username (i.e. doing an anonymous mount) doesn't work. Looking through the
code, it looks like CIFS
what also puzzles me... almost every filesystem that's not at revision 1
anymore (ext2/3/4, reiser4, smb2) does not have the usually omnipresent "fs"
suffix anymore (cf. reiserfs, smbfs).
Maybe it's time to drop all the "fs" suffixes? :)
For the case of cifs (and nfs and afs) the "fs" is part
what also puzzles me... almost every filesystem that's not at revision 1
anymore (ext2/3/4, reiser4, smb2) does not have the usually omnipresent fs
suffix anymore (cf. reiserfs, smbfs).
Maybe it's time to drop all the fs suffixes? :)
For the case of cifs (and nfs and afs) the fs is part of
Here's what I try to do. I want to monitor from a Linux Gentoo
machine with inotify enabled on a directory for new files hosted by a
windows share(Windows server, not Samba).
Samba now uses inotify if available on the server side to support the
Directory Change Notification requested by
Here's what I try to do. I want to monitor from a Linux Gentoo
machine with inotify enabled on a directory for new files hosted by a
windows share(Windows server, not Samba).
Samba now uses inotify if available on the server side to support the
Directory Change Notification requested by
Wilhelm Meier wrote:
m Montag, 2. April 2007 schrieb Wilhelm Meier:
It seems to me that I rewrote cifs_demultiplex_thread to use kthread_run
in DFS patch.
o.k., I found the patch on the list. Will do some testing with it.
o.k., the patch seems to be fine for linux-vserver.
Q (Igor Mammedov) wrote:
Steve French (smfltc) wrote:
No - IIRC the original patch (for the switch of cifs from
kernel_thread to kthread) had a
minor implementation problem in handling the cifs_demultiplex thread,
so this one small
area was left with the old style.
iii) Is it difficult
Q (Igor Mammedov) wrote:
Steve French (smfltc) wrote:
No - IIRC the original patch (for the switch of cifs from
kernel_thread to kthread) had a
minor implementation problem in handling the cifs_demultiplex thread,
so this one small
area was left with the old style.
iii) Is it difficult
Wilhelm Meier wrote:
m Montag, 2. April 2007 schrieb Wilhelm Meier:
It seems to me that I rewrote cifs_demultiplex_thread to use kthread_run
in DFS patch.
o.k., I found the patch on the list. Will do some testing with it.
o.k., the patch seems to be fine for linux-vserver.
"Valentin Zaharov" wrote on 04/01/2007 03:02:07 AM:
> Hi again,
>
> After applying changes manually to 2.6.20.4 according to the link that
> Steven sent I still get those errors (attached below) but no crash so
> far.
> I am wondering if its ok or having errors still will cause freezes.
It is ok
Hi all,
I would like to use cifs inside linux-vserver guests. Discussion this with the
vserver people, we found that cifs is using the new kthread_run and the old
kernel_thread interface for starting kernel-threads. The old-style interface
renders cifs unusable inside a vserver-guest :-(
Hi all,
I would like to use cifs inside linux-vserver guests. Discussion this with the
vserver people, we found that cifs is using the new kthread_run and the old
kernel_thread interface for starting kernel-threads. The old-style interface
renders cifs unusable inside a vserver-guest :-(
Valentin Zaharov wrote on 04/01/2007 03:02:07 AM:
Hi again,
After applying changes manually to 2.6.20.4 according to the link that
Steven sent I still get those errors (attached below) but no crash so
far.
I am wondering if its ok or having errors still will cause freezes.
It is ok and I
strace did show something useful
mount(...) = -1 ENOTDIR (Not a directory)
and then that led me to spotting the obvious bug which is
on your NAS device (server). The server is returning a
malformed (illegal) response.
The Linux cifs client was getting a 22 byte response to a level
strace did show something useful
mount(...) = -1 ENOTDIR (Not a directory)
and then that led me to spotting the obvious bug which is
on your NAS device (server). The server is returning a
malformed (illegal) response.
The Linux cifs client was getting a 22 byte response to a level
From: Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] consolidate generic_writepages and mpage_writepages
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 17:23:25 +0100
From: Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Clean up massive
From: Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] consolidate generic_writepages and mpage_writepages
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 17:23:25 +0100
From: Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Clean up massive
David Chinner wrote:
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 08:02:37AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 06:36:48PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
The issue was somewhat confused by people certainly *reporting* it for
older kernels. Also, as part of the dirty bit cleanups and sanity
David Chinner wrote:
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 08:02:37AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 06:36:48PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
The issue was somewhat confused by people certainly *reporting* it for
older kernels. Also, as part of the dirty bit cleanups and sanity
26 matches
Mail list logo
