Return-Path: Received: from mail-ua0-f171.google.com ([209.85.217.171]:35763 "EHLO mail-ua0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751801AbdGFOZL (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Jul 2017 10:25:11 -0400 Received: by mail-ua0-f171.google.com with SMTP id j53so2485660uaa.2 for ; Thu, 06 Jul 2017 07:25:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1499288361.63624.2.camel@primarydata.com> References: <20170628144758.12225-1-trond.myklebust@primarydata.com> <20170702085354.GA20685@kroah.com> <1499288361.63624.2.camel@primarydata.com> From: Robert Kudyba Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 10:24:54 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Stable request to fix a reference leak and list corruption To: Trond Myklebust Cc: "greg@kroah.com" , "kinglongmee@gmail.com" , "Anna.Schumaker@netapp.com" , "stable@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: >> > > Could we please queue up the following patch as a stable fix for >> > > commit a974deee47? It needs to be applied to v4.10 and older. >> > >> > Now applied, thanks. >> >> Until kernel 4.11.9 is into Fedora's updates, I downgraded our server >> acting as the NIS master to 4.10.16-200. But all NIS users time out >> with "ypserv: #011-> Error #-3. Could this be a different issue with >> rpcbind or nfs-utils? Here are some debug enabled logs for RPC with a >> different error "xs_error_report client ffff8d8223caa000, error=113" >> > > Error 113 is EHOSTUNREACH. It means that either your server is down, or > there is some other networking issue that is preventing the client from > connecting to it (e.g. a firewall setting, route configuration, arp > cache pollution?). Either way, it is unrelated to this particular > patch. Ahh indeed it was firewalld. Not sure why this just cropped up, perhaps some update? Anyways once I ran: firewall-cmd --permanent --add-service=nfs firewall-cmd --permanent --add-service=mountd firewall-cmd --permanent --add-service=rpc-bind firewall-cmd --reload We were back in business with NFS sharing. Thanks so much for the reply & hint as I couldn't find what error 113 meant.