From: Timo Aaltonen Subject: Re: Last call for nfs-utils patches Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 20:12:01 +0200 (EET) Message-ID: References: <47CD680B.1070106@RedHat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, nfsv4@linux-nfs.org To: Steve Dickson Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: nfsv4-bounces@linux-nfs.org Errors-To: nfsv4-bounces@linux-nfs.org List-ID: 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