Subject: Re: [NFS] [BUG] 2.6.23-rc5 kernel BUG at fs/nfs/nfs4xdr.c:945
From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
To: suzuki <suzuki@in.ibm.com>
Cc: Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@gmail.com>,
       Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, bfields@fieldses.org,
       neilb@suse.de, nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       ffilz@us.ibm.com, Poornima <bnpoorni@in.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <46E4FC2F.6040105@in.ibm.com>
References: <46E121B8.4080105@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	 <6bffcb0e0709071656o6881fa17y61818a9733293a4c@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1189289549.13713.4.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <46E4FC2F.6040105@in.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 23:03:48 +0200
Message-Id: <1189458228.6634.4.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 836
Lines: 25

On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 13:41 +0530, suzuki wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I have been trying to debug this issue from my side and could find the 
> following.
> 
> The pathconf() request gets a reply with :
> 
> pathinfo.max_namelen = (unsiged int) -1
> pathinfo.max_link    = 255
> 
> Is this really an expected answer from a server for a proper connection 
> ( for mount requests on an exported dir) ? Is there something that needs 
> to be fixed at server side ?

I assume that this is with my patch applied? Yes: as long as the kernel
sets NAME_MAX to 255, then the above is expected behaviour.

Trond

-
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/