linux-kernel - Re: NFS regression? Odd delays and lockups accessing an NFS export.

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 26 Sep 2008 16:37:06 +0100
From:	Ian Campbell <ijc@...lion.org.uk>
To:	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
Cc:	Tom Tucker <tom@...ngridcomputing.com>,
	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>,
	Grant Coady <gcoady.lk@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, neilb@...e.de,
	linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: NFS regression? Odd delays and lockups accessing an NFS export.

On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 13:03 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 12:33:09PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 08:59 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > I've found that the problem was backported into the stable stream since
> > > I cannot reproduce the issue with 2.6.26 but I can with 2.6.26.5. This
> > > is quite useful since there are only 3 relevant looking changesets in
> > > that range. I will bisect between these before confirming the culprit on
> > > mainline.
> 
> Could you double-check that this is reproduceable with this commit
> applied, and not reproduceable when it's not?

I've reproduced with exactly commit
f41f741838480aeaa3a189cff6e210503cf9c42d on trunk and am now running
2e96d2867245668dbdb973729288cf69b9fafa66 which is the changeset
immediately before.

> I suppose it's not impossible that this could be triggering the problem
> in some very roundabout way, but it seems a bit out of left field--so I
> wonder whether one of the bisection points could have gotten marked good
> when it should have been bad, or vice-versa.

It's possible, the good case is naturally quite hard to establish with
100% certainty. I declared v2.6.26 OK after an uptime of 4 days and 19
hours, compared with failure normally within 1-2 days. It's possible I
was premature in doing so. I'll run 2e96d2867 for at least a full week
before reporting back.

Ian.
-- 
Ian Campbell

Unix is mature OS, windows is still in diapers and they smell badly.
		-- Rafael Skodlar 

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (198 bytes)