Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261578AbVCHWZa (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Mar 2005 17:25:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261692AbVCHWZ3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Mar 2005 17:25:29 -0500 Received: from adsl-110-19.38-151.net24.it ([151.38.19.110]:16002 "HELO develer.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261578AbVCHWZQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Mar 2005 17:25:16 -0500 Message-ID: <422E2643.4010004@develer.com> Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 23:25:07 +0100 From: Bernardo Innocenti User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird (X11/20041216) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Anders Saaby CC: Trond Myklebust , lkml , Neil Conway , nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: NFS client bug in 2.6.8-2.6.11 References: <422D2FDE.2090104@develer.com> <422D485F.5060709@develer.com> <422D4E5A.1050409@develer.com> <200503080956.41086.as@cohaesio.com> In-Reply-To: <200503080956.41086.as@cohaesio.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.90.0.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1641 Lines: 49 Anders Saaby wrote: > On Tuesday 08 March 2005 08:03, Bernardo Innocenti wrote: > >>Bernardo Innocenti wrote: >> >>>Trond Myklebust wrote: >>> >>>I also can't reproduce the problem on an older >>>client running 2.4.21. >> >>Well, actually I tried harder with the 2.4.21 >>client and I obtained a similar effect: >> >>So, instead of ENOENT I get ESTALE on 2.4.21. >> >>May well be a server bug then. The server is running >>2.6.10-1.766_FC3. Do you think I should try installing >>a vanilla kernel on the server? > > > We have seen lots of ESTALE's/ENOENT's when the server is running 2.6.10 > (vanilla). Don't know if this was supposed to be fixed in the 2.6.10-FC > kernels, but vanilla 2.6.11 doesen't seem to have this bug at all. > > You mention a lot of kernel versions including 2.6.11, and I can't really > figure out whether you are talking abount the clients or the server. - > Anyways if your server has only run with 2.6.10 - try 2.6.11. Thank you, I've finally nailed it down by upgrading the *server* kernel from 2.6.10-1.770_FC3 to 2.6.10-1.770_FC3. The latter is basically 2.6.10-ac12 plus a bunch of vendor specific patches. > - Apologies if I missed something obvious. No, *I* did. All the clues I had leaded me to the client side, while the problem was in the server instead. -- // Bernardo Innocenti - Develer S.r.l., R&D dept. \X/ http://www.develer.com/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/