On Wednesday 12 December 2007 04:15:59 Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 04:01:56 +0200 Maxim Levitsky 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 > > > > > > Revert > > > > > > commit 2b1e300a9dfc3196ccddf6f1d74b91b7af55e416 > > > Author: Eric W. Biederman > > > Date: Sun Dec 2 00:33:17 2007 +1100 > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I finally solved this. > > There is no need to revert 2b1e300a9dfc3196ccddf6f1d74b91b7af55e416. > > > > It was actually a deadly mixture of 3 bugs: > > > > 1) Stale handles - Trond's patch fixes it, but I somehow missed it. > > What is "Trond's patch" and where is it now? Message-Id: <1197053179.7532.23.camel-rJ7iovZKK19ZJLDQqaL3InhyD016LWXt@public.gmane.org> It is in beginning of that thread. I attached it for reference. > > > 2) Empty /proc/fs/nfsd (which causes nfs4 failures, and masks the bug #1, since with it the subfolders are just empty) > > [PATCH 2.6.24-rc4] proc: Remove/Fix proc generic d_revalidate fixes it > > That patch was merged into Linus's tree just prior to 2.6.24-rc5. Yes I know, I was testing -rc4, but I put this patch in > > > 3) And as I expected, a userspace bug, which believe me or not has exactly the same symptoms > > like #2 (and doesn't depend on others) > > > > It is a wrong boot script in BLFS that starts nfs daemons in wrong order. > > So there are 3 bugs and each masks the former one :-) . > > > > I revised boot script to use recommended order like in nfs-utils. > > And finally everything works.... > > > > Well... It's relatively common that insufficiently-robust userspace works > OK under kernel N and then stops working under kernel N+1. Even though the > fault lies with userspace, we prefer that it continues to work. > > But it doesn't sounds like that'll be a concern here. Well, no. This boot script doesn't work in 2.6.23 ether. I just didn't use nfs4, and I thought that I don't understand how crossmnt/nohide work. > > Thanks for the followup. > Best regards, Maxim Levitsky