Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753953Ab0LJDJj (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Dec 2010 22:09:39 -0500 Received: from victor.provo.novell.com ([137.65.250.26]:35294 "EHLO victor.provo.novell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752193Ab0LJDJh (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Dec 2010 22:09:37 -0500 Message-ID: <4D0199E2.8030006@suse.de> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 08:39:22 +0530 From: Suresh Jayaraman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100714 SUSE/3.0.6 Thunderbird/3.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeff Layton CC: Steve French , Bernhard Walle , sfrench@samba.org, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, samba-technical@lists.samba.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] cifs: Add information about noserverino References: <1291568855-22604-1-git-send-email-bernhard@bwalle.de> <20101206095725.78422138@tlielax.poochiereds.net> <20101206101214.52a24415@tlielax.poochiereds.net> <20101206163506.56232lqqhc5c3co4@webmail.df.eu> <20101206103836.0714369a@tlielax.poochiereds.net> <4D00C02C.4070006@suse.de> <20101209070952.24793c23@barsoom.rdu.redhat.com> <20101209143448.5c479e50@barsoom.rdu.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4317 Lines: 99 On 12/10/2010 02:14 AM, Steve French wrote: > On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Jeff Layton wrote: >> On Thu, 9 Dec 2010 12:26:39 -0600 >> Steve French wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 6:09 AM, Jeff Layton wrote: >>>> On Thu, 09 Dec 2010 17:10:28 +0530 >>>> Suresh Jayaraman wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 12/06/2010 09:08 PM, Jeff Layton wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, 06 Dec 2010 16:35:06 +0100 >>>>>> Bernhard Walle wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Zitat von Jeff Layton : >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm still not sure I like this patch however. It potentially means a >>>>>>>> lot of printk spam since these things have no ratelimiting. It also >>>>>>>> doesn't tell me anything about which server might be giving me grief. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Maybe this should be turned into a cFYI? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Well, if I see it in the kernel log, it doesn't matter if it's info or >>>>>>> something else. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The bottom line though is that running 32-bit applications that were >>>>>>>> built without -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 on a 64-bit kernel is a very bad >>>>>>>> idea. It would be nice to be able to alert users that things aren't >>>>>>>> working the way they expect, but I'm not sure this is the right place >>>>>>>> to do that. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Well, but there *are* such application (in my case it was Softmaker Office >>>>>>> which is a proprietary word processor) and it's quite nice if you know >>>>>>> how you can workaround it when you encounter such a problem. That's all. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sure...but this problem is not limited to CIFS. Many modern filesystems >>>>>> use 64-bit inodes. Running this application on XFS or NFS for instance >>>>>> is likely to give you the same trouble. You just hit it on CIFS because >>>>>> the server happened to give you a very large inode number. >>>>>> >>>>>> If we're going to add printk's for this situation, it probably ought to >>>>>> be in a more generic place. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> By generic place, did you mean at the VFS level? I think at VFS level, >>>>> there is little information about the Server or underlying fs and this >>>>> information doesn't seem too critical that VFS should warn/care much about. >>>>> >>>>> May be sticking to a cFYI along with Server detail is a good idea? >>>>> >>>> My poing was mainly that there's nothing special about CIFS in this >>>> regard, other than the fact that servers regularly send us inodes that >>>> are larger than 2^32. Why should we do this for cifs but not for nfs, >>>> xfs, ext4, etc? >>>> >>>> The filldir function gets a dentry as an argument, so it could >>>> reasonably generate a printk for this. I'm also not keen on >>>> the printk recommending noserverino for this. That has its own >>>> drawbacks. >>>> >>>> A cFYI for this sort of thing seems reasonable however. >>> >>> I agree that a cFYI is reasonable. �The next obvious question is: do >>> we need to add code to generate unique 32 bit inode numbers >>> that don't collide (as IIRC Samba does by xor the high and low 32 >>> bits of the inode number) when the app can't support ino64 >>> I would prefer not to go back to noserverino since that has worse >>> drawbacks. >>> >> >> Right, the fact that noserverino works around this is really just due >> to an implementation detail of iunique(). That should probably be >> discouraged as a solution since it's not guaranteed to be a workaround >> in the future. >> >> If we did add such a switch, I'd suggest that we pattern it after what >> NFS did for this. They added an "enable_ino64" module parameter a >> couple of years ago that defaults to "true". What are the advantages we have by making it a module parameter as opposed to an mount option? XFS seems to have "inode64" mount option for quite sometime now, without much issues.. > makes me uncomfortable to break ino64 for all mounts - when we > may have one application on one mount that needs it (might be > better to make a mount related) > > -- Suresh Jayaraman -- 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/