From: Steven Timm Subject: Re: NFS possible race condition, nfs_unlink vs. d_lookup Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 15:15:25 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: References: <1141418871.10976.31.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.91] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1FFHq9-0000sO-AF for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 03 Mar 2006 13:29:33 -0800 Received: from mailgw2.fnal.gov ([131.225.111.12]) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1FFHq8-0000yw-17 for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 03 Mar 2006 13:29:33 -0800 Received: from mailav1.fnal.gov (mailav1.fnal.gov [131.225.111.18]) by mailgw2.fnal.gov (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.06 (built Mar 28 2005)) with SMTP id <0IVK00KOTLN9IB@mailgw2.fnal.gov> for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 03 Mar 2006 15:15:25 -0600 (CST) Received: from mailgw1.fnal.gov ([131.225.111.11]) by mailav1.fnal.gov (SAVSMTP 3.1.7.47) with SMTP id M2006030315152530324 for ; Fri, 03 Mar 2006 15:15:25 -0600 Received: from conversion-daemon.mailgw1.fnal.gov by mailgw1.fnal.gov (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.06 (built Mar 28 2005)) id <0IVK00E01LBLGH@mailgw1.fnal.gov> (original mail from timm@fnal.gov) for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 03 Mar 2006 15:15:25 -0600 (CST) In-reply-to: <1141418871.10976.31.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> To: Trond Myklebust Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: On Fri, 3 Mar 2006, Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Fri, 2006-03-03 at 09:57 -0600, Steven Timm wrote: > >> My question.. is the 2.4.21-37 kernel as distributed by Red Hat also >> vulnerable to this race condition? If so, is there any >> patch that is available? The code in dir.c in the 2.4 series >> kernel is different enough such that this patch won't apply to it. > > No idea. Are you saying that RedHat shipped a 2.4.x kernel with RCU > patches to the vfs before they had been tested in the 2.6.x kernel? I don't have enough expertise to tell what they have done. I can attach the dir.c in question if someone is able to look. All I know is that we are seeing a similar condition, namely nfs_safe_remove errors happening on our client, for what this patch was supposed to fix in the 2.5/2.6 series kernels. Any help would be appreciated. Steve Timm > > Cheers, > Trond > > -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Steven C. Timm, Ph.D (630) 840-8525 timm@fnal.gov http://home.fnal.gov/~timm/ Fermilab Computing Div/Core Support Services Dept./Scientific Computing Section Assistant Group Leader, Farms and Clustered Systems Group Lead of Computing Farms Team ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs