_______________________________________________
NFSv4 mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux-nfs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4
On Thu, 6 Mar 2008, Steve Dickson wrote:
> Timo Aaltonen wrote:
>> What about the changes which make rpc.gssd spam the syslog less, ie.
>> lowering the priority of two printerr's? It did the trick wonderfully,
>> no more syslog overflows when user creds have expired.
> Which patches are you referring to? It appears I missed them...
I didn't actually post anything yet, it was discussed recently though. But
here it goes:
diff -Naur nfs-utils-1.1.1/utils/gssd/gss_util.c nfs-utils-1.1.1-new/utils/gssd/gss_util.c
--- nfs-utils-1.1.1/utils/gssd/gss_util.c 2007-10-19 06:07:28.000000000 +0300
+++ nfs-utils-1.1.1-new/utils/gssd/gss_util.c 2008-02-27 17:23:40.000000000 +0200
@@ -168,7 +168,7 @@
min = min_gss_buf.value;
}
- printerr(0, "ERROR: GSS-API: error in %s(): %s - %s\n",
+ printerr(1, "ERROR: GSS-API: error in %s(): %s - %s\n",
m, maj, min);
if (maj_gss_buf.length != 0)
diff -Naur nfs-utils-1.1.1/utils/gssd/gssd_proc.c nfs-utils-1.1.1-new/utils/gssd/gssd_proc.c
--- nfs-utils-1.1.1/utils/gssd/gssd_proc.c 2007-10-19 06:07:28.000000000 +0300
+++ nfs-utils-1.1.1-new/utils/gssd/gssd_proc.c 2008-02-27 17:23:10.000000000 +0200
@@ -464,7 +464,7 @@
if (write(k5_fd, buf, p - buf) < p - buf) goto out_err;
return 0;
out_err:
- printerr(0, "Failed to write error downcall!\n");
+ printerr(1, "Failed to write error downcall!\n");
return -1;
}
On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, Steve Dickson wrote:
>
> I'm planning on cutting a nfs-utils-1.1.2 release since
> there has been a number commits since the last 1.1.1 release.
>
> The attached list are all of the commits that have been made to
> the git://linux-nfs.org/nfs-utils git tree.
>
> (Note: to get a working copy of this tree use:
> git clone git://linux-nfs.org/nfs-utils nfs-utils)
>
> So if you don't see a commit you have posted to either
> the nfs or nfsv4 mailing list it probably means I missed it
> so you might want to bring it to my attention.
> (Please Note, the patch authors in some of my earlier
> commit are incorrect. This was simply due to my lack
> of git knowledge. Once it was pointed it out to me,
> the problem was corrected.)
>
> Also if you were holding off posting some (hopefully)
> non-intrusive patches now it the time. There is a very
> good chance I will not cut the release until this weekend.
Here's another patch (by Niall Sheridan) that needs approval:
- - -
rpc.gssd FD_ALLOC_BLOCK too low
The max number of sec=krb5 mounts that rpc.gssd will handle is hardcoded
at 32. From utils/gssd/gssd.h:
#define FD_ALLOC_BLOCK 32
This causes problems and errors like:
RPC: AUTH_GSS upcall timed out.
when the number of kerberized nfs mounts approaches the hard limit.
Since linux supports a maximum of 256 nfs mounts, perhaps this number can
be upped to 200 or so.
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/11961434/nfs-utils-fd-alloc-block.debdiff
- - -
what say you?
t
On Sat, 8 Mar 2008, Timo Aaltonen wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, Steve Dickson wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm planning on cutting a nfs-utils-1.1.2 release since
>> there has been a number commits since the last 1.1.1 release.
>>
>> The attached list are all of the commits that have been made to
>> the git://linux-nfs.org/nfs-utils git tree.
>>
>> (Note: to get a working copy of this tree use:
>> git clone git://linux-nfs.org/nfs-utils nfs-utils)
>>
>> So if you don't see a commit you have posted to either
>> the nfs or nfsv4 mailing list it probably means I missed it
>> so you might want to bring it to my attention.
>> (Please Note, the patch authors in some of my earlier
>> commit are incorrect. This was simply due to my lack
>> of git knowledge. Once it was pointed it out to me,
>> the problem was corrected.)
>>
>> Also if you were holding off posting some (hopefully)
>> non-intrusive patches now it the time. There is a very
>> good chance I will not cut the release until this weekend.
>
> Here's another patch (by Niall Sheridan) that needs approval:
>
> - - -
>
> rpc.gssd FD_ALLOC_BLOCK too low
>
> The max number of sec=krb5 mounts that rpc.gssd will handle is hardcoded
> at 32. From utils/gssd/gssd.h:
> #define FD_ALLOC_BLOCK 32
>
> This causes problems and errors like:
> RPC: AUTH_GSS upcall timed out.
> when the number of kerberized nfs mounts approaches the hard limit.
>
> Since linux supports a maximum of 256 nfs mounts, perhaps this number can
> be upped to 200 or so.
>
> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/11961434/nfs-utils-fd-alloc-block.debdiff
>
> - - -
>
> what say you?
Oops, should've checked the git first.. this is fixed by commit
d15fa02fe38f6f1c9183540810ac7bfeac0c7c17
:)
t
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 10:17:31AM -0500, Steve Dickson wrote:
> So if you don't see a commit you have posted to either
> the nfs or nfsv4 mailing list it probably means I missed it
> so you might want to bring it to my attention. '
I've posted a few patches (some of them as trivial as spelling fixes in man
pages) three times with no response, so I gave up.
FWIW, Debian's current patch set (including the aforemented patches) is at
http://people.debian.org/~sesse/nfs-utils-patches/
I believe they should all, except 02-document-debian-init-scripts.patch, be
applicable for upstream. (Some of them are already applied.)
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, Steve Dickson wrote:
>
> I'm planning on cutting a nfs-utils-1.1.2 release since
> there has been a number commits since the last 1.1.1 release.
>
> The attached list are all of the commits that have been made to
> the git://linux-nfs.org/nfs-utils git tree.
>
> (Note: to get a working copy of this tree use:
> git clone git://linux-nfs.org/nfs-utils nfs-utils)
>
> So if you don't see a commit you have posted to either
> the nfs or nfsv4 mailing list it probably means I missed it
> so you might want to bring it to my attention.
> (Please Note, the patch authors in some of my earlier
> commit are incorrect. This was simply due to my lack
> of git knowledge. Once it was pointed it out to me,
> the problem was corrected.)
>
> Also if you were holding off posting some (hopefully)
> non-intrusive patches now it the time. There is a very
> good chance I will not cut the release until this weekend.
What about the changes which make rpc.gssd spam the syslog less, ie.
lowering the priority of two printerr's? It did the trick wonderfully, no
more syslog overflows when user creds have expired.
t
Timo Aaltonen wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, Steve Dickson wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm planning on cutting a nfs-utils-1.1.2 release since
>> there has been a number commits since the last 1.1.1 release.
>>
>> The attached list are all of the commits that have been made to
>> the git://linux-nfs.org/nfs-utils git tree.
>>
>> (Note: to get a working copy of this tree use:
>> git clone git://linux-nfs.org/nfs-utils nfs-utils)
>>
>> So if you don't see a commit you have posted to either
>> the nfs or nfsv4 mailing list it probably means I missed it
>> so you might want to bring it to my attention.
>> (Please Note, the patch authors in some of my earlier
>> commit are incorrect. This was simply due to my lack
>> of git knowledge. Once it was pointed it out to me,
>> the problem was corrected.)
>>
>> Also if you were holding off posting some (hopefully)
>> non-intrusive patches now it the time. There is a very
>> good chance I will not cut the release until this weekend.
>
> What about the changes which make rpc.gssd spam the syslog less, ie.
> lowering the priority of two printerr's? It did the trick wonderfully,
> no more syslog overflows when user creds have expired.
Which patches are you referring to? It appears I missed them...
steved.