--On Friday, April 22, 2005 11:08:20 -0400 Jason McCormick
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've attached a text file with a pre and post AFS write output of 'cmdebug
localhost'.
Nothing out of the ordinary. Definitely no lock conflicts, which is what I
wanted to check for.
So we're back to it being a
> I suppose it's also possible that CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY is causing a
> problem, but
> I think it is unlikely (there are no resched points inside ObtainXXXLock,
> so I don't see how they could race). If you want to make sure that isn't
> the problem, then either a) test on an smp kernel,
Usin
>you upgraded afsd and the module, yes?
Yes, dpkg -l | grep -i openafs:
atalab1:~# dpkg -l | grep -i openafs
ii openafs-client 1.3.81-3 The AFS distributed
ii openafs-dbserv 1.3.81-3 The AFS distributed
ii openafs-filese 1.3.81-3 The AFS distributed
ii openafs-krb5 1.3-10
> Can you start afsd with -verbose -debug?
> It'll tell you what syscall returned what error code.
The log file is attached... It is edited as the full log is 500K...
Vlad
afsd: My home cell is 'linux.lse.ac.uk'
ParseCacheInfoFile: Opening cache info file '/etc/openafs/cacheinfo'...
ParseCacheInf
> This doesn't really make sense. It's possible that one or more of these
> threads is actually blocked on a lock (which running 'cmdebug '
> will reveal if it is the case)
I've attached a text file with a pre and post AFS write output of 'cmdebug
localhost'.
> b) build afs with
> the followin
Hello,
I have a little problem with aklog and openafs 1.3.x.
I am administrating one afs server, and some 150 clients. The server is
fc1, with openafs 1.2.13 for filesharing (user accounts), openldap for
user data, and kerberos for authentication. The clients are (at the
moment) fc1, and also wit
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Vladimir Konrad schrieb:
|>you upgraded afsd and the module, yes?
|
|
| Yes, dpkg -l | grep -i openafs:
|
| atalab1:~# dpkg -l | grep -i openafs
| ii openafs-client 1.3.81-3 The AFS distributed
| ii openafs-dbserv 1.3.81-3 The AFS distribu
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005, Jason McCormick wrote:
Using the SMP kernel seems to work perfectly. So it's definitely something
in the uniproc kernel. Is there any random patches floating around out
there?
Chas Williams suggested converting to using mutexes always, and we will do
that for 1.3.82; I can't
dang it... Here's the text file.
--
Jason McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CERT Infrastructure Team
# cmdebug localhost -long
Lock afs_xvcache status: (none_waiting)
Lock afs_xdcache status: (none_waiting)
Lock afs_xserver status: (none_waiting)
Lock afs_xvcb status: (none_waiting)
Lock afs_xbrs
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005, Vladimir Konrad wrote:
Hello!
After upgrade from OpenAFS 1.2.? to 1.3.81, the afsd refuses to start
(the other components of OpenAFS start ok). If I try running afsd from
the command line, I get:
you upgraded afsd and the module, yes?
___
On Apr 22, 2005, at 3:48 PM, Vladimir Konrad wrote:
this strongly implies that the kernel module is not loaded. does lsmod
actually say that a module named 'openafs' is loaded?
Yes, the module loads and is loaded (checked with lsmod) before
starting afsd from command line...
Can you start afsd w
> this strongly implies that the kernel module is not loaded. does lsmod
> actually say that a module named 'openafs' is loaded?
Yes, the module loads and is loaded (checked with lsmod) before starting afsd
from command line...
> > is openafs instead of openafs.mp
> the 'openafs.mp.o' concept
--On Friday, April 22, 2005 02:22:29 PM +0100 Vladimir Konrad
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
After upgrade from OpenAFS 1.2.? to 1.3.81, the afsd refuses to start
(the other components of OpenAFS start ok). If I try running afsd from
the command line, I get:
afsd: Error -1 in basic initialization.
af
Hello!
After upgrade from OpenAFS 1.2.? to 1.3.81, the afsd refuses to start
(the other components of OpenAFS start ok). If I try running afsd from
the command line, I get:
afsd: Error -1 in basic initialization.
Adding cell 'linux.lse.ac.uk': error -1
afsd: No check server daemon in client.
afsd
* Kevin [2005-04-21 13:08:56 -0400]:
> Realizing that this might be a questionable security practice, I'd like to
> learn how to set up an afs volume that would be mounted in the afs tree and
> that would act as a replacement for a locally mounted /tmp partition where
> running processes could w
15 matches
Mail list logo
