lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Feb]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 4.1GB limit with nfs3, 2.6 & knfsd?
On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 04:53:56PM +1100, Neil Brown wrote:
> On Monday February 9, akpm@osdl.org wrote:
> > Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I was trying to tar and bzip2 some directories over the weekend and I think
> > > I may have found a bug.
> > >
> > > The operation would consistantly fail when the bzip2ed tar file hit 4.1GB
> > > when directed at a 2.6.1-bk2-nfs-stale-file-handles knfsd server from
> > > another computer running the same kernel.
> > >
> > > If I try the operation against a local filesystem, or a 2.4.24 knfsd server
> > > on the network there are no failures and the file is at 18GB and growing on
> > > the local filesystem (not enough space on the 2.4 server...).
> > >
> > > This is all from the same nfs client computer.
> > >
> > > I plan on doing some more tests with dd and cat against the server after the
> > > files have finished compressing.
> > >
> > > Anyone have any ideas? I know this could be userspace, but why does it work
> > > against a 2.4 knfsd and on the local filesystem?
> >
> > Yes, something funny does seem to be happening.
> >
> > I have a simple NFS mount of an ext2 filesystem via localhost and a 6GB
> > `dd' fails after 4G:
> >
> > vmm:/mnt/localhost> strace dd if=/dev/zero of=foo bs=1M count=6000
> > ...
> > write(1, "\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0"..., 1048576) = 1048576
> > read(0, "\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0"..., 1048576) = 1048576
> > write(1, "\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0"..., 1048576) = 1048576
> > read(0, "\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0"..., 1048576) = 1048576
> > write(1, "\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0"..., 1048576) = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
> >
>
> This is probably fixed by the following patch that is sitting in my
> queue.
> While 2.4 technically needs the same patch, it isn't affected because
> it completely ignores the "offset", rather than almost-completely
> ignoring it.
>
> NeilBrown

Would this patch work with 2.6.1-bk2-nfs-stale-file-handles, or does it
depend on any other patches?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:00    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site