Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 09:42:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 09:42:40 -0400 Received: from lightning.swansea.linux.org.uk ([194.168.151.1]:4871 "EHLO the-village.bc.nu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 09:42:34 -0400 Subject: Re: NFSv3 and linux-2.4.10-ac3 => oops To: matt@theBachChoir.org.uk (Matt Bernstein) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 14:47:09 +0100 (BST) Cc: trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no (Trond Myklebust), hpa@transmeta.com (H. Peter Anvin), alan@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: from "Matt Bernstein" at Oct 02, 2001 12:32:49 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL6] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: From: Alan Cox Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I wonder if this is related to oopses I sent in in the last two days? > We're running 4GB setups with NFSv3 client and server on our fileservers, > and the oopses might (don't really have strong correlation evidence yet) > be related to when our fileservers push online backups to cheaper NFS > servers (running the same kernel based on 2.4.9-ac10). Is there a last > known good kernel I can try on my production systems while I try to > reproduce the problem on smaller boxes? Or would you like me to try your > patch? Are these oopses new as of the 2.4.10 based tree. If so do you see them with 2.4.10-ac3 ? Right now we have a sort of bug candidate set that is VM NFS LOCKING 2.4.9-ac10 old old old 2.4.9-ac16 new old old 2.4.9-ac18 new old half-way 2.4.10-ac3 new new new that may help deduce which problem Alan - 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/