lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 10:26:28 -0700 From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> To: juanjo@...rtus.es Cc: bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org, Steven French <sfrench@...ibm.com>, Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 10694] New: Sis 191 not responding when mount.cifs (switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the bugzilla web interface). On Wed, 14 May 2008 03:55:57 -0700 (PDT) bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org wrote: > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10694 > > Summary: Sis 191 not responding when mount.cifs > Product: Drivers > Version: 2.5 > KernelVersion: 2.6.25.3 > Platform: All > OS/Version: Linux > Tree: Mainline > Status: NEW > Severity: normal > Priority: P1 > Component: Network > AssignedTo: jgarzik@...ox.com > ReportedBy: juanjo@...rtus.es > > > Latest working kernel version: non > Earliest failing kernel version: 2.6.24 > Distribution: Other > Hardware Environment: Acer Extensa E261 (SIS191 on ISA bridge SIS968 with > RLT8211BL transceiver) > Software Environment: linux boot to allow an unattended installation. > http://unattended.cvs.sourceforge.net/unattended/unattended/linuxboot/ > Problem Description: mounting a network share with mount.cfis gets an error > about the server not responding. Modifying the mtu of the ethernet interface > make it to work. > > Steps to reproduce: > > mount.cifs \\ntinstall\install /z -o "username=guest,ro,nocase" > > An error on the Screen: > -------------------------------------- > CIFS VFS: server not responding > CIFS VFS: No responde to cmd 46 mid 10 > -------------------------------------- > execute: > ifconfig eth0 mtu 1942 > > Then the network share is accessible. And the error disappear. > How strange. Good detective work, btw. Did we a) change the MTU size with 2.6.25 or b) break larger MTUs in 2.6.25? Can you find out what the MTU size was with 2.6.24? And what size is the MTU in 2.6.25 before you reset it? Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists