On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 22:55:02 +0100
Gianluca Alberici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I finally got it. Problem and solution have been found from 6 month but
> nobody cared...up to now those servers have not been mantained, this
> problem is not discussed anywhere else than the following link.
>
Hi Chuck,
I finally got it. Problem and solution have been found from 6 month but
nobody cared...up to now those servers have not been mantained, this
problem is not discussed anywhere else than the following link.
The bug (userspace server side i would say at this point) is well
described
Hi Gianluca-
On Feb 6, 2008, at 1:25 PM, Gianluca Alberici wrote:
Hello all,
Thanks to Chuck's help i finally decided to proceed to a git bisect
and found the bad patch. Is there anybody that has an idea why it
breaks userspace nfs servers as we have seen ? Sorry for emailing
directly
Hello all,
Thanks to Chuck's help i finally decided to proceed to a git bisect and
found the bad patch. Is there anybody that has an idea why it breaks
userspace nfs servers as we have seen ? Sorry for emailing directly
Chuck Lever and Andrew Morton but i really wanted to thank Chuck for his
Hi Gianluca-
On Feb 6, 2008, at 1:25 PM, Gianluca Alberici wrote:
Hello all,
Thanks to Chuck's help i finally decided to proceed to a git bisect
and found the bad patch. Is there anybody that has an idea why it
breaks userspace nfs servers as we have seen ? Sorry for emailing
directly
Hi Chuck,
I finally got it. Problem and solution have been found from 6 month but
nobody cared...up to now those servers have not been mantained, this
problem is not discussed anywhere else than the following link.
The bug (userspace server side i would say at this point) is well
described
On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 22:55:02 +0100
Gianluca Alberici [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I finally got it. Problem and solution have been found from 6 month but
nobody cared...up to now those servers have not been mantained, this
problem is not discussed anywhere else than the following link.
The bug
Hello Chuck,
As you requested i have finally found out that the problem was
introduced in 2.6.22 (2.6.21.7 works, after 2.6.21.7 theres 2.6.22)
I have also examined the changeslogs: 2.6.22 introduce a certain number
of patches into NFS client. Many of them are yours and Trond's.
Pls can
Hello all,
Sorry for being down for so long but i have decided to test the latest
2.6.24 kernel because of the huge number of NFS patches (especially at
RPC UDP protocol level) introduced mainly by Netapp people (Trond
Myklebust et al.), hoping that maybe the problem would have magically
Hello all,
Sorry for being down for so long but i have decided to test the latest
2.6.24 kernel because of the huge number of NFS patches (especially at
RPC UDP protocol level) introduced mainly by Netapp people (Trond
Myklebust et al.), hoping that maybe the problem would have magically
Hello Chuck,
As you requested i have finally found out that the problem was
introduced in 2.6.22 (2.6.21.7 works, after 2.6.21.7 theres 2.6.22)
I have also examined the changeslogs: 2.6.22 introduce a certain number
of patches into NFS client. Many of them are yours and Trond's.
Pls can
On Dec 25, 2007, at 5:04 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:35:17 +0100 Gianluca Alberici
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
I can do better. I have investigated a bit the problem:
1) The problem arises only with the userspace nfsd (Universal nfsd
2.2).
I have realized that
Hello all,
I've seen that Trond and the other guys at Netapp are working hard on
the NFS support and there are dozens of patches in latest
2.6.24rcX s kernels regarding both RPC and NFS.
I can only hope, as Andrew Morton said, that the policy of new NFS impl
was 'dont break'.
In the end those
Hello all,
I've seen that Trond and the other guys at Netapp are working hard on
the NFS support and there are dozens of patches in latest
2.6.24rcX s kernels regarding both RPC and NFS.
I can only hope, as Andrew Morton said, that the policy of new NFS impl
was 'dont break'.
In the end those
On Dec 25, 2007, at 5:04 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:35:17 +0100 Gianluca Alberici
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I can do better. I have investigated a bit the problem:
1) The problem arises only with the userspace nfsd (Universal nfsd
2.2).
I have realized that
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:35:17 +0100 Gianluca Alberici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I can do better. I have investigated a bit the problem:
>
> 1) The problem arises only with the userspace nfsd (Universal nfsd 2.2).
> I have realized that the latest patches introduced in 2.6.22 have
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:35:17 +0100 Gianluca Alberici [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I can do better. I have investigated a bit the problem:
1) The problem arises only with the userspace nfsd (Universal nfsd 2.2).
I have realized that the latest patches introduced in 2.6.22 have
Hello,
I can do better. I have investigated a bit the problem:
1) The problem arises only with the userspace nfsd (Universal nfsd 2.2).
I have realized that the latest patches introduced in 2.6.22 have
changed a lot of things into NFS.
2) The following code has been debugged with
Hello,
I can do better. I have investigated a bit the problem:
1) The problem arises only with the userspace nfsd (Universal nfsd 2.2).
I have realized that the latest patches introduced in 2.6.22 have
changed a lot of things into NFS.
2) The following code has been debugged with
On Dec 22, 2007, at 5:52 AM, Gianluca Alberici wrote:
I've run into this problem 2.6.23.9. The open syscall will return
"Invalid argument" when O_TRUNC is set on existing files.
The same file can be opened for append or removed.
The evidence is for example:
mars:~# mount localhost:/opt/nfs/
On Dec 22, 2007, at 5:52 AM, Gianluca Alberici wrote:
I've run into this problem 2.6.23.9. The open syscall will return
Invalid argument when O_TRUNC is set on existing files.
The same file can be opened for append or removed.
The evidence is for example:
mars:~# mount localhost:/opt/nfs/
21 matches
Mail list logo
