Re: NFS 2.2.3-ac4 problems with elm

Matthew Bernstein (mas01mb@mcs.gold.ac.uk)
Wed, 24 Mar 1999 10:55:44 +0000 (GMT)


On Tue, 23 Mar 1999, Thierry Danis wrote:

> At the time the problem occurs, dmesg reports :
>
> > __nfs_fhget: inode 3429797 busy, i_count=2, i_nlink=1
> > nfs_free_dentries: found Mail/mailbox, d_count=1, hashed=0
> > __nfs_fhget: inode 3429797 still busy, i_count=2
> > __nfs_fhget: killing Mail/mailbox filehandle
> > nfs_revalidate_inode: Mail/mailbox getattr failed, ino=3429797, error=-116
> > NFS: bad fh 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
> > 4f0080000200000000000a00a55534000ccc992700000a0002000000544cbc5b
> > nfs_revalidate_inode: Mail/mailbox getattr failed, ino=3429797, error=-116
> > NFS: bad fh 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
> > 4f0080000200000000000a00a55534000ccc992700000a0002000000544cbc5b
>
> The NFS server is a Solaris 2.5.1 machine.
>
> I run 2.2.3-ac2 before for days and did not get these messages.

I did! (client 2xPPro 200 2.2.3-ac2 SMP gcc 2.7.2.3; server Solaris 2.6)
NFS on my (K6-2 300 2.2.3-ac4 UP egcs-1.1.1) appears to be even worse, though.
(I've not yet had an Oops on my UP box, though, just many state "D" processes)
<wild guess>Is there some nasty race more likely to show up under
optimised compiling/faster hardware?</wild guess>

Matt

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/