Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 12 Apr 2002 04:29:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 12 Apr 2002 04:29:24 -0400 Received: from mail.ekh.no ([213.184.194.22]:50449 "EHLO romeo.skybert.no") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 12 Apr 2002 04:29:24 -0400 Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 10:29:05 +0200 (CEST) From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Erik_Inge_Bols=F8?= To: Urban Widmark cc: Subject: Re: 2.2.20 umount oops (probably smbfs related) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-AntiVirus: scanned for viruses by AMaViS 0.2.0-pre6-clm-rl-8 (http://amavis.org/) X-AntiVirus: scanned for viruses by AMaViS 0.2.0-pre6-clm-rl-8 (http://amavis.org/) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Urban Widmark wrote: > On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Erik Inge Bols? wrote: > > >>EIP: c0126389 > > Trace: c012914e > > Trace: c01291f8 > > Trace: c01292ed > > Trace: c0129308 > > Trace: c0109144 > > Code: c0126389 00000000 <_EIP>: <=== > > Code: c0126389 0: 8b 43 1c movl 0x1c(%ebx),%eax <=== > > Your trace doesn't include any smb_ references, but I suppose the cd8ef644 > ones might be. I don't see where do_umount calls fput so ... Right. Seems that the somewhat ancient ksymoops (0.6e) didn't pick up the smbfs module's symbols. Will update. > This is usually bad and you may want to investigate why it died/upgrade > your samba version regardless of the patch below. Recent smbmounts can log > to file and with a suitable debuglevel you may find out what happened > (debug=4 or so). Thanks for the tip. Upgrading the 2.0.6 to 2.0.10 ASAP. > > smb_lookup: find //email.txt failed, error=-5 > > smb_get_length: recv error = 512 > > smb_request: result -512, setting invalid > > smb_dont_catch_keepalive: did not get valid server! > > smbfs unmount code "put_super" does: > if (server->sock_file) { > smb_proc_disconnect(server); > smb_dont_catch_keepalive(server); > fput(server->sock_file); > } Aha! I traced it as far as these lines myself yesterday, but couldn't figure out what nulled sock_file, and why. Thanks! > If that is what happened the patch below should help. It simply changes > smbfs not to try and send a disconnect message if it isn't connected. > Which makes sense anyway, no need to connect just to say goodbye. Even if > that may the polite thing to do :) Thanks, will try the patch as soon as I find time to rebuild. Looks sane :) > > Note that the smb share in question is mounted, alive and well as of this > > moment, I can read files on it just fine - it's just the umount of it that > > oopsed. > > Sounds strange. Could that be some automounter that mounted another one > for you? Could be, I suppose. No automounter running, but the script that oopsed is run once an hour and does an umount/mount to deal with the windows server being rebooted - we want the share to stay mounted, no matter if we reboot the old NT4 box. (If we reboot it and don't do this, we get I/O errors on accessing the mount point.) -- Erik I. Bols?, Triangel Maritech Software AS | Skybert AS Tlf: 712 41 694 Mobil: 915 79 512 - 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/