Hello,
Have run into a situation where mtab does not match
/proc/mounts in that mtab has numerous entries that
have expired off and removed, yet does not show that
it has been removed from mtab. Is this known and is
there a fix?
Kernel 2.4.21 and 23
nfs-utils 1.06
automount 4.1.2
Thanks!
Phy
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway
http://2004/guadec.org
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
if there are a lot of mounts on the system, then /proc/mounts can be
truncated and not show all of them.
however, if there are more mounts in /proc/mounts than in /etc/mtab,
there is probably a bug in mount. not unheard of.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phy Prabab [mailto:[email protected]]=20
> Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 2:21 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [NFS] mtab and procs not in sync?
>=20
>=20
> Hello,
>=20
> Have run into a situation where mtab does not match
> /proc/mounts in that mtab has numerous entries that
> have expired off and removed, yet does not show that
> it has been removed from mtab. Is this known and is
> there a fix?
>=20
> Kernel 2.4.21 and 23
> nfs-utils 1.06
> automount 4.1.2
>=20
> Thanks!
> Phy
>=20
>=20
> =09
> =09
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://messenger.yahoo.com/=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
> Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
> GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway
> http://2004/guadec.org
> _______________________________________________
> NFS maillist - [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
>=20
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway
http://2004/guadec.org
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
okay, how about many more mounts in mtab but not in
proc/mounts? cat of proc/mounts shows 10 mount
points, mtab show 23. I am guessing a bug?
Thank you for your time.
Phy
--- "Lever, Charles" <[email protected]> wrote:
> if there are a lot of mounts on the system, then
> /proc/mounts can be
> truncated and not show all of them.
>
> however, if there are more mounts in /proc/mounts
> than in /etc/mtab,
> there is probably a bug in mount. not unheard of.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Phy Prabab [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 2:21 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: [NFS] mtab and procs not in sync?
> >
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > Have run into a situation where mtab does not
> match
> > /proc/mounts in that mtab has numerous entries
> that
> > have expired off and removed, yet does not show
> that
> > it has been removed from mtab. Is this known and
> is
> > there a fix?
> >
> > Kernel 2.4.21 and 23
> > nfs-utils 1.06
> > automount 4.1.2
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Phy
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> > http://messenger.yahoo.com/
> >
> >
> >
>
-------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME
> Foundation
> > Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source
> Desktop Event.
> > GNOME Users and Developers European Conference,
> 28-30th June in Norway
> > http://2004/guadec.org
> > _______________________________________________
> > NFS maillist - [email protected]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
> >
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway
http://2004/guadec.org
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Phy Prabab wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Have run into a situation where mtab does not match
> /proc/mounts in that mtab has numerous entries that
> have expired off and removed, yet does not show that
> it has been removed from mtab. Is this known and is
> there a fix?
This is not an NFS, kernel or automount issue.
The locking in mount appears to be broken. It usually shows up with autofs
because it put quite a bit of pressure on mount.
But what is your environment?
I need more info. to understand this.
What 4.1.2 patches, if any, have you applied?
>
> Kernel 2.4.21 and 23
> nfs-utils 1.06
> automount 4.1.2
I've tried to work around this problem and I discovered a coding error
with that work the other day. I have a patch available at
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/daemons/autofs/v4
called
autofs-4.1.3-mtab_lock.patch
It is against 4.1.3 but should apply OK to 4.1.2.
This problem probably belongs on the autofs list. You can subscribe at
http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
Ian
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway
http://2004/guadec.org
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Lever, Charles wrote:
> if there are a lot of mounts on the system, then /proc/mounts can be
> truncated and not show all of them.
That's very cool.
And a timely piece of information since I was about to change autofs to
rely on it instead of mtab.
So we can't rely on /proc/mounts being correct?
And mount consistently corrupts /etc/mtab under load.
And the util-linux list is closed and unresponsive last time I tried.
I will need to revisit this to give an account of what I think may be
wrong with mounts mtab locking. Indeed, I have couple of questions about
how it is supposed to work as it's not clear from the code.
Have you got any ideas how I could get the attention of the maintainer of
mount?
Ian
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway
http://2004/guadec.org
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
Do you know how many 'a lot of mounts' is?
I believe there was a problem with /proc/mounts in 2.2 kernels (limited
to one page) - is there still a limit in 2.4 or 2.6 kernels?
I currently symlink /proc/mounts to /etc/mtab on diskless machines to
get round the issue that /etc/mtab can not trusted to be correct. I only
have a maximum of a few 10's of mounts at any one time.
James Pearson
Lever, Charles wrote:
> if there are a lot of mounts on the system, then /proc/mounts can be
> truncated and not show all of them.
>
> however, if there are more mounts in /proc/mounts than in /etc/mtab,
> there is probably a bug in mount. not unheard of.
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Phy Prabab [mailto:[email protected]]
>>Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 2:21 PM
>>To: [email protected]
>>Subject: [NFS] mtab and procs not in sync?
>>
>>
>>Hello,
>>
>>Have run into a situation where mtab does not match
>>/proc/mounts in that mtab has numerous entries that
>>have expired off and removed, yet does not show that
>>it has been removed from mtab. Is this known and is
>>there a fix?
>>
>>Kernel 2.4.21 and 23
>>nfs-utils 1.06
>>automount 4.1.2
>>
>>Thanks!
>>Phy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>__________________________________
>>Do you Yahoo!?
>>Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
>>http://messenger.yahoo.com/
>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
>>Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
>>GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway
>>http://2004/guadec.org
>>_______________________________________________
>>NFS maillist - [email protected]
>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
>>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
> Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
> GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway
> http://2004/guadec.org
> _______________________________________________
> NFS maillist - [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
>
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway
http://2004/guadec.org
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
as far as i can tell, the 4KB limit is common to x86 on 2.2 and 2.4.
2.6 has replaced the old /proc read method with seq_file, so i believe
/proc/mounts on 2.6 kernels will not suffer from this problem.
it's not a fixed number of mounts, because the length of each line in
/proc/mounts depends on what mount options are in effect. the limit is
the number of characters in the file.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Pearson [mailto:[email protected]]=20
> Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 6:29 AM
> To: Lever, Charles
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [NFS] mtab and procs not in sync?
>=20
>=20
> Do you know how many 'a lot of mounts' is?
>=20
> I believe there was a problem with /proc/mounts in 2.2=20
> kernels (limited=20
> to one page) - is there still a limit in 2.4 or 2.6 kernels?
>=20
> I currently symlink /proc/mounts to /etc/mtab on diskless machines to=20
> get round the issue that /etc/mtab can not trusted to be=20
> correct. I only=20
> have a maximum of a few 10's of mounts at any one time.
>=20
> James Pearson
>=20
> Lever, Charles wrote:
> > if there are a lot of mounts on the system, then=20
> /proc/mounts can be=20
> > truncated and not show all of them.
> >=20
> > however, if there are more mounts in /proc/mounts than in=20
> /etc/mtab,=20
> > there is probably a bug in mount. not unheard of.
> >=20
> >=20
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Phy Prabab [mailto:[email protected]]
> >>Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 2:21 PM
> >>To: [email protected]
> >>Subject: [NFS] mtab and procs not in sync?
> >>
> >>
> >>Hello,
> >>
> >>Have run into a situation where mtab does not match /proc/mounts in=20
> >>that mtab has numerous entries that have expired off and=20
> removed, yet=20
> >>does not show that it has been removed from mtab. Is this=20
> known and=20
> >>is there a fix?
> >>
> >>Kernel 2.4.21 and 23
> >>nfs-utils 1.06
> >>automount 4.1.2
> >>
> >>Thanks!
> >>Phy
> >>
> >>
> >>=09
> >> =09
> >>__________________________________
> >>Do you Yahoo!?
> >>Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.=20
> >>http://messenger.yahoo.com/
> >>
> >>
> >>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
> >>Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.=20
> >>GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th=20
> June in Norway=20
> >>http://2004/guadec.org=20
> _______________________________________________
> >>NFS maillist - [email protected]
> >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
> >>
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
> > Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.=20
> > GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th=20
> June in Norway=20
> > http://2004/guadec.org=20
> _______________________________________________
> > NFS maillist - [email protected]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
> >=20
>=20
>=20
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway
http://2004/guadec.org
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
On a 2.4.26 kernel on x86 I can get /proc/mounts to go over 4K (over 8K
with about 100 automounted file systems).
Having a quick look through the kernel code I can see seq_file used in
relation to proc_mounts_operations (fs/proc/base.c) - however as I don't
pretend to understand the code, I can't say this is the case ...
If 2.4.X does use seq_file, then is it safe to say /proc/mounts doesn't
suffer from a truncation problem?
James Pearson
Lever, Charles wrote:
> as far as i can tell, the 4KB limit is common to x86 on 2.2 and 2.4.
> 2.6 has replaced the old /proc read method with seq_file, so i believe
> /proc/mounts on 2.6 kernels will not suffer from this problem.
>
> it's not a fixed number of mounts, because the length of each line in
> /proc/mounts depends on what mount options are in effect. the limit is
> the number of characters in the file.
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: James Pearson [mailto:[email protected]]
>>Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 6:29 AM
>>To: Lever, Charles
>>Cc: [email protected]
>>Subject: Re: [NFS] mtab and procs not in sync?
>>
>>
>>Do you know how many 'a lot of mounts' is?
>>
>>I believe there was a problem with /proc/mounts in 2.2
>>kernels (limited
>>to one page) - is there still a limit in 2.4 or 2.6 kernels?
>>
>>I currently symlink /proc/mounts to /etc/mtab on diskless machines to
>>get round the issue that /etc/mtab can not trusted to be
>>correct. I only
>>have a maximum of a few 10's of mounts at any one time.
>>
>>James Pearson
>>
>>Lever, Charles wrote:
>>
>>>if there are a lot of mounts on the system, then
>>
>>/proc/mounts can be
>>
>>>truncated and not show all of them.
>>>
>>>however, if there are more mounts in /proc/mounts than in
>>
>>/etc/mtab,
>>
>>>there is probably a bug in mount. not unheard of.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Phy Prabab [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 2:21 PM
>>>>To: [email protected]
>>>>Subject: [NFS] mtab and procs not in sync?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>Have run into a situation where mtab does not match /proc/mounts in
>>>>that mtab has numerous entries that have expired off and
>>
>>removed, yet
>>
>>>>does not show that it has been removed from mtab. Is this
>>
>>known and
>>
>>>>is there a fix?
>>>>
>>>>Kernel 2.4.21 and 23
>>>>nfs-utils 1.06
>>>>automount 4.1.2
>>>>
>>>>Thanks!
>>>>Phy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>__________________________________
>>>>Do you Yahoo!?
>>>>Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
>>>>http://messenger.yahoo.com/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
>>>>Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
>>>>GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th
>>
>>June in Norway
>>
>>>>http://2004/guadec.org
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>>>NFS maillist - [email protected]
>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
>>>Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
>>>GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th
>>
>>June in Norway
>>
>>>http://2004/guadec.org
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>>NFS maillist - [email protected]
>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
>>>
>>
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway
http://2004/guadec.org
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
i would guess that if seq_file is used, then /proc/mounts should be OK.
i was looking at a RHEL AS 2.1 system last week that used the single
page I/O model for /proc/mounts, and it was definitely busted.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Pearson [mailto:[email protected]]=20
> Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 11:05 AM
> To: Lever, Charles
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [NFS] mtab and procs not in sync?
>=20
>=20
> On a 2.4.26 kernel on x86 I can get /proc/mounts to go over=20
> 4K (over 8K=20
> with about 100 automounted file systems).
>=20
> Having a quick look through the kernel code I can see=20
> seq_file used in=20
> relation to proc_mounts_operations (fs/proc/base.c) - however=20
> as I don't=20
> pretend to understand the code, I can't say this is the case ...
>=20
> If 2.4.X does use seq_file, then is it safe to say=20
> /proc/mounts doesn't=20
> suffer from a truncation problem?
>=20
> James Pearson
>=20
> Lever, Charles wrote:
> > as far as i can tell, the 4KB limit is common to x86 on 2.2 and 2.4.
> > 2.6 has replaced the old /proc read method with seq_file,=20
> so i believe
> > /proc/mounts on 2.6 kernels will not suffer from this problem.
> >=20
> > it's not a fixed number of mounts, because the length of=20
> each line in
> > /proc/mounts depends on what mount options are in effect. =20
> the limit is
> > the number of characters in the file.
> >=20
> >=20
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: James Pearson [mailto:[email protected]]=20
> >>Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 6:29 AM
> >>To: Lever, Charles
> >>Cc: [email protected]
> >>Subject: Re: [NFS] mtab and procs not in sync?
> >>
> >>
> >>Do you know how many 'a lot of mounts' is?
> >>
> >>I believe there was a problem with /proc/mounts in 2.2=20
> >>kernels (limited=20
> >>to one page) - is there still a limit in 2.4 or 2.6 kernels?
> >>
> >>I currently symlink /proc/mounts to /etc/mtab on diskless=20
> machines to=20
> >>get round the issue that /etc/mtab can not trusted to be=20
> >>correct. I only=20
> >>have a maximum of a few 10's of mounts at any one time.
> >>
> >>James Pearson
> >>
> >>Lever, Charles wrote:
> >>
> >>>if there are a lot of mounts on the system, then=20
> >>
> >>/proc/mounts can be=20
> >>
> >>>truncated and not show all of them.
> >>>
> >>>however, if there are more mounts in /proc/mounts than in=20
> >>
> >>/etc/mtab,=20
> >>
> >>>there is probably a bug in mount. not unheard of.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>>From: Phy Prabab [mailto:[email protected]]
> >>>>Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 2:21 PM
> >>>>To: [email protected]
> >>>>Subject: [NFS] mtab and procs not in sync?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Hello,
> >>>>
> >>>>Have run into a situation where mtab does not match=20
> /proc/mounts in=20
> >>>>that mtab has numerous entries that have expired off and=20
> >>
> >>removed, yet=20
> >>
> >>>>does not show that it has been removed from mtab. Is this=20
> >>
> >>known and=20
> >>
> >>>>is there a fix?
> >>>>
> >>>>Kernel 2.4.21 and 23
> >>>>nfs-utils 1.06
> >>>>automount 4.1.2
> >>>>
> >>>>Thanks!
> >>>>Phy
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>=09
> >>>> =09
> >>>>__________________________________
> >>>>Do you Yahoo!?
> >>>>Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.=20
> >>>>http://messenger.yahoo.com/
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
> >>>>Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.=20
> >>>>GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th=20
> >>
> >>June in Norway=20
> >>
> >>>>http://2004/guadec.org=20
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>
> >>>>NFS maillist - [email protected]
> >>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
> >>>Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.=20
> >>>GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th=20
> >>
> >>June in Norway=20
> >>
> >>>http://2004/guadec.org=20
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>
> >>>NFS maillist - [email protected]
> >>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
> >>>
> >>
> >=20
> >=20
>=20
>=20
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway
http://2004/guadec.org
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
It looks like seq_file for /proc/mounts was introduced with 2.4.19 ...
James Pearson
Lever, Charles wrote:
> i would guess that if seq_file is used, then /proc/mounts should be OK.
>
> i was looking at a RHEL AS 2.1 system last week that used the single
> page I/O model for /proc/mounts, and it was definitely busted.
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: James Pearson [mailto:[email protected]]
>>Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 11:05 AM
>>To: Lever, Charles
>>Cc: [email protected]
>>Subject: Re: [NFS] mtab and procs not in sync?
>>
>>
>>On a 2.4.26 kernel on x86 I can get /proc/mounts to go over
>>4K (over 8K
>>with about 100 automounted file systems).
>>
>>Having a quick look through the kernel code I can see
>>seq_file used in
>>relation to proc_mounts_operations (fs/proc/base.c) - however
>>as I don't
>>pretend to understand the code, I can't say this is the case ...
>>
>>If 2.4.X does use seq_file, then is it safe to say
>>/proc/mounts doesn't
>>suffer from a truncation problem?
>>
>>James Pearson
>>
>>Lever, Charles wrote:
>>
>>>as far as i can tell, the 4KB limit is common to x86 on 2.2 and 2.4.
>>>2.6 has replaced the old /proc read method with seq_file,
>>
>>so i believe
>>
>>>/proc/mounts on 2.6 kernels will not suffer from this problem.
>>>
>>>it's not a fixed number of mounts, because the length of
>>
>>each line in
>>
>>>/proc/mounts depends on what mount options are in effect.
>>
>>the limit is
>>
>>>the number of characters in the file.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: James Pearson [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 6:29 AM
>>>>To: Lever, Charles
>>>>Cc: [email protected]
>>>>Subject: Re: [NFS] mtab and procs not in sync?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Do you know how many 'a lot of mounts' is?
>>>>
>>>>I believe there was a problem with /proc/mounts in 2.2
>>>>kernels (limited
>>>>to one page) - is there still a limit in 2.4 or 2.6 kernels?
>>>>
>>>>I currently symlink /proc/mounts to /etc/mtab on diskless
>>
>>machines to
>>
>>>>get round the issue that /etc/mtab can not trusted to be
>>>>correct. I only
>>>>have a maximum of a few 10's of mounts at any one time.
>>>>
>>>>James Pearson
>>>>
>>>>Lever, Charles wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>if there are a lot of mounts on the system, then
>>>>
>>>>/proc/mounts can be
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>truncated and not show all of them.
>>>>>
>>>>>however, if there are more mounts in /proc/mounts than in
>>>>
>>>>/etc/mtab,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>there is probably a bug in mount. not unheard of.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>>From: Phy Prabab [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>>>Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 2:21 PM
>>>>>>To: [email protected]
>>>>>>Subject: [NFS] mtab and procs not in sync?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Have run into a situation where mtab does not match
>>
>>/proc/mounts in
>>
>>>>>>that mtab has numerous entries that have expired off and
>>>>
>>>>removed, yet
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>does not show that it has been removed from mtab. Is this
>>>>
>>>>known and
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>is there a fix?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Kernel 2.4.21 and 23
>>>>>>nfs-utils 1.06
>>>>>>automount 4.1.2
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks!
>>>>>>Phy
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>__________________________________
>>>>>>Do you Yahoo!?
>>>>>>Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
>>>>>>http://messenger.yahoo.com/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
>>>>>>Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
>>>>>>GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th
>>>>
>>>>June in Norway
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>http://2004/guadec.org
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>NFS maillist - [email protected]
>>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
>>>>>Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
>>>>>GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th
>>>>
>>>>June in Norway
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>http://2004/guadec.org
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>NFS maillist - [email protected]
>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
> Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
> GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway
> http://2004/guadec.org
> _______________________________________________
> NFS maillist - [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
>
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway
http://2004/guadec.org
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004, Lever, Charles wrote:
> i would guess that if seq_file is used, then /proc/mounts should be OK.
>
> i was looking at a RHEL AS 2.1 system last week that used the single
> page I/O model for /proc/mounts, and it was definitely busted.
We probably need to start talking versions, back ports and vendor kernels
to get a clear picture of the situation here.
Ian
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James Pearson [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 11:05 AM
> > To: Lever, Charles
> > Cc: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [NFS] mtab and procs not in sync?
> >
> >
> > On a 2.4.26 kernel on x86 I can get /proc/mounts to go over
> > 4K (over 8K
> > with about 100 automounted file systems).
> >
> > Having a quick look through the kernel code I can see
> > seq_file used in
> > relation to proc_mounts_operations (fs/proc/base.c) - however
> > as I don't
> > pretend to understand the code, I can't say this is the case ...
> >
> > If 2.4.X does use seq_file, then is it safe to say
> > /proc/mounts doesn't
> > suffer from a truncation problem?
> >
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway
http://2004/guadec.org
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs