On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 21:19:00 -0500 Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2007-12-11 at 18:15 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > 1) Stale handles - Trond's patch fixes it, but I somehow missed it.
> >
> > What is "Trond's patch" and where is it now?
>
> He means the one this whol
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 04:15:59 Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 04:01:56 +0200 Maxim Levitsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > argh, this is getting bad.
> > >
> > > Can you please test the below patch asap? Against 2.6.24-rc4 or
> > > latest-linus.
> > >
> > >
> > >
On Tue, 2007-12-11 at 18:15 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > 1) Stale handles - Trond's patch fixes it, but I somehow missed it.
>
> What is "Trond's patch" and where is it now?
He means the one this whole thread started with. See attachment...
Trond
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, 2007-12-07 at
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 04:01:56 +0200 Maxim Levitsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > argh, this is getting bad.
> >
> > Can you please test the below patch asap? Against 2.6.24-rc4 or
> > latest-linus.
> >
> >
> > From: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Revert
> >
> > commit 2b1
On Monday 10 December 2007 23:03:05 Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:05:30 +0200
> Maxim Levitsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Monday 10 December 2007 16:36:09 J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 04:19:12PM +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> > > > ...
> > > > > It
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:05:30 +0200
Maxim Levitsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 10 December 2007 16:36:09 J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 04:19:12PM +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> > > ...
> > > > It is best not to use nohide - we should probably mark it as
> > > > 'lega
On Dec 10, 2007 9:19 AM, Maxim Levitsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...
> > It is best not to use nohide - we should probably mark it as
> > 'legacy'.
> >
> > Simply export the top level mountpoint as 'crossmnt' and everything
> > below there will be exported.
> >
> > > Where should I put those o
On Monday 10 December 2007 17:47:47 J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 05:05:30PM +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> > On Monday 10 December 2007 16:36:09 J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 04:19:12PM +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> > > > ...
> > > > > It is best not to u
On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 05:05:30PM +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> On Monday 10 December 2007 16:36:09 J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 04:19:12PM +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> > > ...
> > > > It is best not to use nohide - we should probably mark it as
> > > > 'legacy'.
> > > >
On Monday 10 December 2007 16:36:09 J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 04:19:12PM +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> > ...
> > > It is best not to use nohide - we should probably mark it as
> > > 'legacy'.
> > >
> > > Simply export the top level mountpoint as 'crossmnt' and everything
>
On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 04:19:12PM +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> ...
> > It is best not to use nohide - we should probably mark it as
> > 'legacy'.
> >
> > Simply export the top level mountpoint as 'crossmnt' and everything
> > below there will be exported.
> >
> > > Where should I put those op
...
> It is best not to use nohide - we should probably mark it as
> 'legacy'.
>
> Simply export the top level mountpoint as 'crossmnt' and everything
> below there will be exported.
>
> > Where should I put those options in root file-system export or in submount
> > export?
>
> crossmnt goes
On Sunday December 9, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Saturday 08 December 2007 01:43:28 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Saturday, 8 of December 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 17:51:58 -0500
> > > Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 2007-12
On Sun, Dec 09, 2007 at 02:20:44AM +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> Due to the fact that I was bitten by this bug (I thought it is a feature),
> and a bit of lack
> of understanding of NFS4 I want to ask few questions about NFS:
>
> 1) I want to export whole file-system with submounts to a range o
On Saturday 08 December 2007 01:43:28 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, 8 of December 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 17:51:58 -0500
> > Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Fri, 2007-12-07 at 14:39 -0500, Shane wrote:
> > > > On Dec 7, 2007 2:16
Alexey Dobriyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I very much agree. ->shadow_proc is so ugly, so it's not funny anymore.
> Adding such hook for proc part of networking _and_ for modules is just asking
> for trouble as was demonstrated.
Alexey however we do this we fundamentally have to proc_lookup,
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> OK, perhaps a revert is the best thing to do here. I don't think anyone
> will be expecting fully finalised and robust netns support in 2.6.24.
I do think we expect /proc/net when the netns support is disabled
to be as robust as it has been prior to 2.
On Dec 7, 2007 7:15 PM, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 03:00:43 +0300
> Alexey Dobriyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Dec 08, 2007 at 12:43:28AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Saturday, 8 of December 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 07
On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 03:00:43 +0300
Alexey Dobriyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 08, 2007 at 12:43:28AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Saturday, 8 of December 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 17:51:58 -0500
> > > Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
On Sat, Dec 08, 2007 at 12:43:28AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, 8 of December 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 17:51:58 -0500
> > Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Fri, 2007-12-07 at 14:39 -0500, Shane wrote:
> > > > On Dec 7, 2007 2
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 17:51:58 -0500
> Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Fri, 2007-12-07 at 14:39 -0500, Shane wrote:
>> > On Dec 7, 2007 2:16 PM, Shane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > ...
>> > > Confirmed working in rc4-git5. I'll de
On Saturday, 8 of December 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 17:51:58 -0500
> Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Fri, 2007-12-07 at 14:39 -0500, Shane wrote:
> > > On Dec 7, 2007 2:16 PM, Shane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > ...
> > > > Confirmed working in r
On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 17:51:58 -0500
Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2007-12-07 at 14:39 -0500, Shane wrote:
> > On Dec 7, 2007 2:16 PM, Shane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > ...
> > > Confirmed working in rc4-git5. I'll deploy this kernel in a few more
> > > spots and check
On Fri, 2007-12-07 at 14:39 -0500, Shane wrote:
> On Dec 7, 2007 2:16 PM, Shane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...
> > Confirmed working in rc4-git5. I'll deploy this kernel in a few more
> > spots and check for other regressions.
>
> Hmm, I installed a new kernel built from the same sources on th
On Fri, 2007-12-07 at 14:33 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 13:46:19 -0500
> Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Fri, 2007-12-07 at 13:14 -0500, Shane wrote:
> > > On Dec 7, 2007 7:02 AM, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > ...
> > > > > 2.6.24-rc
On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 13:46:19 -0500
Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2007-12-07 at 13:14 -0500, Shane wrote:
> > On Dec 7, 2007 7:02 AM, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > ...
> > > > 2.6.24-rc3-git1 is last known good kernel. The problem also exists
> > > > with th
On Dec 7, 2007 2:16 PM, Shane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> Confirmed working in rc4-git5. I'll deploy this kernel in a few more
> spots and check for other regressions.
Hmm, I installed a new kernel built from the same sources on the NFS
server. And now I don't see anything at all in the cros
On Friday, 7 of December 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 23:45:58 -0500 Shane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > The NFS crossmnt/nohide feature has been working beautifully
> > in 2.6.23. NFS in general has been really good in 2.6.23. Thanks!
> >
> > However, starting
On Dec 7, 2007 1:55 PM, Shane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 7, 2007 1:46 PM, Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...
> > This problem has already been reported. The fix (which I'm planning on
> > sending to Linus soon) is appended.
>
> Thanks Trond. Sorry for the duplicate report, I
On Dec 7, 2007 1:46 PM, Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> This problem has already been reported. The fix (which I'm planning on
> sending to Linus soon) is appended.
Thanks Trond. Sorry for the duplicate report, I did actually do some
searching...
I will confirm the fix.
Shane
--
On Fri, 2007-12-07 at 13:14 -0500, Shane wrote:
> On Dec 7, 2007 7:02 AM, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...
> > > 2.6.24-rc3-git1 is last known good kernel. The problem also exists
> > > with the latest snap 2.6.24-rc4-git4. NFS server is 2.6.23-rc9 and
> > > is unchanged.
> >
> > hm,
> I will do a few more builds/boots and check -rc3-git2 and -rc3-git3.
Okie, the problem was introduced in 2.6.24-rc3-git2.
2.6.24-rc3-git1 Good
2.6.24-rc3-git2 Bad
The exact output from one 'ls' command is:
ls: /dirA/dirB/dirC: Stale NFS file handle
ls: /dirA/dirB/dirC: Stale NFS file hand
On Dec 7, 2007 7:02 AM, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> > 2.6.24-rc3-git1 is last known good kernel. The problem also exists
> > with the latest snap 2.6.24-rc4-git4. NFS server is 2.6.23-rc9 and
> > is unchanged.
>
> hm, there have been no nfs changes since 2.6.24-rc4.
Ok, but the
On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 23:45:58 -0500 Shane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The NFS crossmnt/nohide feature has been working beautifully
> in 2.6.23. NFS in general has been really good in 2.6.23. Thanks!
>
> However, starting in 2.6.24-rc3-git4, I immediately get 'NFS Stale
> file handle' mes
34 matches
Mail list logo
