Re: [NFS] [BUG] 2.6.23-rc5 kernel BUG at fs/nfs/nfs4xdr.c:945

2007-09-28 Thread Kamalesh Babulal
Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 00:31 +0530, Kamalesh Babulal wrote: >>> I'm mystified. I'm quite unable to reproduce this on my own setup: the >>> ENAMETOOLONG error reporting mechanism prevents me from even getting >>> near the above bug. >>> >>> Could you add a little printk into

Re: [NFS] [BUG] 2.6.23-rc5 kernel BUG at fs/nfs/nfs4xdr.c:945

2007-09-24 Thread Trond Myklebust
On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 00:31 +0530, Kamalesh Babulal wrote: > > I'm mystified. I'm quite unable to reproduce this on my own setup: the > > ENAMETOOLONG error reporting mechanism prevents me from even getting > > near the above bug. > > > > Could you add a little printk into the 'encode_lookup' rout

Re: [NFS] [BUG] 2.6.23-rc5 kernel BUG at fs/nfs/nfs4xdr.c:945

2007-09-24 Thread Kamalesh Babulal
Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 18:36 +0530, Kamalesh Babulal wrote: >> Trond Myklebust wrote: >>> On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 01:56 +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote: >>> Hi, On 07/09/2007, Kamalesh Babulal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sep 7 11:42:49 p55lp2 k

Re: [NFS] [BUG] 2.6.23-rc5 kernel BUG at fs/nfs/nfs4xdr.c:945

2007-09-19 Thread Trond Myklebust
On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 18:36 +0530, Kamalesh Babulal wrote: > Trond Myklebust wrote: > > On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 01:56 +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> On 07/09/2007, Kamalesh Babulal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> Sep 7 11:42:49 p55lp2 kernel: kernel BUG at fs/nf

Re: [NFS] [BUG] 2.6.23-rc5 kernel BUG at fs/nfs/nfs4xdr.c:945

2007-09-10 Thread suzuki
Trond Myklebust wrote: On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 13:41 +0530, suzuki wrote: Hi I have been trying to debug this issue from my side and could find the following. The pathconf() request gets a reply with : pathinfo.max_namelen = (unsiged int) -1 pathinfo.max_link= 255 Is this really an expec

Re: [NFS] [BUG] 2.6.23-rc5 kernel BUG at fs/nfs/nfs4xdr.c:945

2007-09-10 Thread Trond Myklebust
On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 13:41 +0530, suzuki wrote: > Hi > > I have been trying to debug this issue from my side and could find the > following. > > The pathconf() request gets a reply with : > > pathinfo.max_namelen = (unsiged int) -1 > pathinfo.max_link= 255 > > Is this really an expected a

Re: [NFS] [BUG] 2.6.23-rc5 kernel BUG at fs/nfs/nfs4xdr.c:945

2007-09-10 Thread Kamalesh Babulal
Trond Myklebust wrote: On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 01:56 +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote: Hi, On 07/09/2007, Kamalesh Babulal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Sep 7 11:42:49 p55lp2 kernel: kernel BUG at fs/nfs/nfs4xdr.c:945! Sep 7 11:42:49 p55lp2 kernel: Oops: Exception in kernel mode, sig: 5 [#1

Re: [NFS] [BUG] 2.6.23-rc5 kernel BUG at fs/nfs/nfs4xdr.c:945

2007-09-10 Thread suzuki
Hi I have been trying to debug this issue from my side and could find the following. The pathconf() request gets a reply with : pathinfo.max_namelen = (unsiged int) -1 pathinfo.max_link= 255 Is this really an expected answer from a server for a proper connection ( for mount requests on

Re: [NFS] [BUG] 2.6.23-rc5 kernel BUG at fs/nfs/nfs4xdr.c:945

2007-09-08 Thread Trond Myklebust
On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 01:56 +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote: > Hi, > > On 07/09/2007, Kamalesh Babulal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sep 7 11:42:49 p55lp2 kernel: kernel BUG at fs/nfs/nfs4xdr.c:945! > > Sep 7 11:42:49 p55lp2 kernel: Oops: Exception in kernel mode, sig: 5 [#1] > > Sep 7 11:42:49