On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 7:00 AM, William Allen Simpson <
william.allen.simp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/27/18 9:56 AM, William Allen Simpson wrote:
>
>> I'm not able to reproduce. Could you tell me which EAGAIN is
>> happening? The log line will say "svc_vc_wait" or "svc_vc_recv",
>> and have
Hi, I just pushed V2.5.5 tag that includes many bug fixes from V2.6-rc1 tag.
Highlights
* File descriptor leaks
* Sending invalid attributes
* Ref count leaks
* Cookie collisions in mdcache
* ABBA deadlocks
* Memory leaks
And many more
Regards, Malahal.
On 1/27/18 9:56 AM, William Allen Simpson wrote:
I'm not able to reproduce. Could you tell me which EAGAIN is
happening? The log line will say "svc_vc_wait" or "svc_vc_recv",
and have the actual error code on it. Maybe this is EWOULDBLOCK?
Of course, neither EAGAIN or EWOULDBLOCK should be
On 1/26/18 8:53 PM, William Allen Simpson wrote:
In fact, I don't understand how we could get EAGAIN, according to the
documentation. But it's logged. Good idea about differentiating the
two identical log lines. I'd prefer text rather than the number 2.
And in the adjacent code, you'll see
With Dan's latest ntirpc update, I'm seeing a new error. But this is
my first testing on Fedora 27, so maybe a Fedora change?
nsm_connect :NLM :CRIT :connect to statd failed: RPC: Unknown protocol
Actually, that's not exactly how the error looks; the string list is
missing its commas. My bad.
