[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46E61FEA.9010800@in.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 10:26:10 +0530
From: suzuki <suzuki@...ibm.com>
To: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>
CC: Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@...il.com>,
Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
bfields@...ldses.org, neilb@...e.de, nfs@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ffilz@...ibm.com,
Poornima <bnpoorni@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [NFS] [BUG] 2.6.23-rc5 kernel BUG at fs/nfs/nfs4xdr.c:945
Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 13:41 +0530, suzuki wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> I have been trying to debug this issue from my side and could find the
>> following.
>>
>> The pathconf() request gets a reply with :
>>
>> pathinfo.max_namelen = (unsiged int) -1
>> pathinfo.max_link = 255
>>
>> Is this really an expected answer from a server for a proper connection
>> ( for mount requests on an exported dir) ? Is there something that needs
>> to be fixed at server side ?
>
> I assume that this is with my patch applied?
No. This is without your patch. So I am trying to debug why the server
is sending a -1 ! (which sounds like an error ?)
Thanks
Suzuki K P
IBM Linux Technology Centre
Yes: as long as the kernel
> sets NAME_MAX to 255, then the above is expected behaviour.
>
> Trond
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists