On Monday, 8 of December 2008, Pekka Enberg wrote:
Hi Dennis,
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 8:18 PM, Dennis Hardy [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
I just mounted a network drive (Windows Server) via CIFS under 2.6.27.8, and
the sizes reported by "df" are completely incorrect:
root@exodus:~# df -h /mnt/fsv1
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
//fsv1/Users 446G -222G 667G - /mnt/fsv1
root@exodus:~# df /mnt/fsv1
Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
//fsv1/Users 467403140 -231816588 699219728 - /mnt/fsv1
root@exodus:~# mount | grep fsv1
//fsv1/Users on /mnt/fsv1 type cifs (rw,mand)
root@exodus:~#
Does anyone else see this sort of behavior with 2.6.27.8? This worked fine
in 2.6.27.6 (we skipped 2.6.27.7)...
Ideas?
Well, lets cc the relevant people so your report isn't lost in the noise.
FWIW, it seems to be related to this one: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/12/8/7
Thanks,
Rafael
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 8:18 PM, Dennis Hardy [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
I just mounted a network drive (Windows Server) via CIFS under 2.6.27.8, and
the sizes reported by "df" are completely incorrect:
...
quoted
quoted
Does anyone else see this sort of behavior with 2.6.27.8? This worked fine
in 2.6.27.6 (we skipped 2.6.27.7)...
There were several cifs updates in .8 but AFAIU none in .7.
FWIW, it seems to be related to this one: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/12/8/7
Holger's report is about the userland SMB/CIFS server, while Denis's is
about kernelspace client code. They look like separate issues to me.
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- ==-- -=---
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
Yes - they look distinct
Steve French
Senior Software Engineer
Linux Technology Center - IBM Austin
phone: 512-838-2294
email: sfrench at-sign us dot ibm dot com
Stefan Richter [off-list ref]
12/08/2008 02:58 PM
To
"Rafael J. Wysocki" [off-list ref]
cc
Pekka Enberg [off-list ref], Dennis Hardy
[off-list ref], linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, layton@redhat.com,
Steven French/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, Greg KH [off-list ref],
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Holger Hoffstaette [off-list ref]
Subject
Re: CIFS regression in 2.6.27.8
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 8:18 PM, Dennis Hardy [off-list ref]
wrote:
quoted
quoted
I just mounted a network drive (Windows Server) via CIFS under
2.6.27.8, and
quoted
quoted
the sizes reported by "df" are completely incorrect:
...
quoted
quoted
Does anyone else see this sort of behavior with 2.6.27.8? This worked
fine
quoted
quoted
in 2.6.27.6 (we skipped 2.6.27.7)...
There were several cifs updates in .8 but AFAIU none in .7.
FWIW, it seems to be related to this one:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/12/8/7
Holger's report is about the userland SMB/CIFS server, while Denis's is
about kernelspace client code. They look like separate issues to me.
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- ==-- -=---
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 21:12:48 +0100
"Rafael J. Wysocki" [off-list ref] wrote:
On Monday, 8 of December 2008, Pekka Enberg wrote:
quoted
Hi Dennis,
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 8:18 PM, Dennis Hardy [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
I just mounted a network drive (Windows Server) via CIFS under 2.6.27.8, and
the sizes reported by "df" are completely incorrect:
root@exodus:~# df -h /mnt/fsv1
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
//fsv1/Users 446G -222G 667G - /mnt/fsv1
root@exodus:~# df /mnt/fsv1
Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
//fsv1/Users 467403140 -231816588 699219728 - /mnt/fsv1
root@exodus:~# mount | grep fsv1
//fsv1/Users on /mnt/fsv1 type cifs (rw,mand)
root@exodus:~#
Does anyone else see this sort of behavior with 2.6.27.8? This worked fine
in 2.6.27.6 (we skipped 2.6.27.7)...
I tried it on both i386 and x86_64 and had no problems. Is this client
non-x86 by any chance?