2002-05-17 06:11:39

by NeilBrown

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: Error: RPC request reserved 244 but used 248

On Friday May 17, [email protected] wrote:
> Hi...
>
> I have been running nhfsstone on a tcp-mount NFS partition. Both the
> client and the server are running 2.4.8. The server uses ReiserFS for
> its disk partition. I've applied the respective nfs-tcp patches to the
> client and server... and was able to mount the nfs export using mount
> -otcp on the client...
>
> However, during the test, the server kept giving the error:
>
> RPC request reserved 244 but used 248
>
> Any idea what this error could mean and how to stop it?

It means that I can't count, and that the patch you have is a bit
out-of-date.
The latext -ac patch should work fine.

I probably wont be putting out another complete NFS patch until 2.4.19
comes out.

NeilBrown

_______________________________________________________________

Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply
the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: [email protected]
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs


2002-05-17 10:45:13

by Abhas Abhinav

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: Error: RPC request reserved 244 but used 248

On Fri, 17 May 2002, Neil Brown wrote:

>--|> client and the server are running 2.4.8. The server uses ReiserFS for
^^^^^^^^^^
This was "small" typo - it should've been
2.4.18!

>--|It means that I can't count, and that the patch you have is a bit
>--|out-of-date.
>--|The latext -ac patch should work fine.
>--|
>--|I probably wont be putting out another complete NFS patch until 2.4.19
>--|comes out.

I patched the server kernel using the patch-Bd-NfsdAll for 2.4.18 that I
downloaded from cse.unsw.edu.au. So I guess I am using your latest
patches. The client was patched using 2.4.18 + Trond's NFS client
patch linux-2.4.18-NFS_ALL.dif. Other than that both the server and the
client were patched for reiserfs quota support (Chris Mason's patches).

All these patches were downloaded during the last 14 hours...

I am basically looking at test NFS-TCP support for a file server design
for a mail server. We're using reiserfs throughout.

Would the -ac tree be stable enough to experiment with this? And are
there any major advantages in using -ac tree or can I get away with
using 2.4.18-stable.

thanks for your help,
abhas.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Abhas Abhinav | Free Software at its product-ive best.
CEO, DeepRoot Linux
http://www.deeproot.co.in ---- Server Appliances ----
Ph: +91 (80) 856 5624 ---- Linux Support and Services ----
-------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________________________

Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply
the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: [email protected]
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs