Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 08 Dec 2008 17:46:20 +0100 | From | Stefan Richter <> | Subject | Re: Nasty regression from .27.7 to .27.8: idle samba goes crazy |
| |
Holger Hoffstaette wrote at LKML: > On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 08:34:22 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> On Monday, 8 of December 2008, Holger Hoffstaette wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I just encountered a nasty symptom for the second time that has started to >>> occur after updating my home server from vanilla 2.6.27.7 to .8 (same >>> config). >>> >>> A while after disconnecting a samba client, the smbd samba server >>> process goes crazy and consumes 100% CPU. From that time on it is >>> unkillable (kill -9 returns but the process continues to run). The only >>> recourse is reboot, which works without problem (i.e. unmounting the >>> served filesystems is apparently possible?). I tried to attach to the >>> process with gdb but that just hung. >>> >>> The system is a generic old single-core P4 box with a single SATA drive, >>> Gentoo userland and Samba is 3.0.33 (in async mode). The kernel has no >>> patches or binary drivers. It has been rock solid before the update and >>> shows no other signs of weirdness in logs or otherwise. I downgraded to .7 >>> for now and will see what happens, but since it worked before I am certain >>> that this is a regression in the .8 release. >>> >>> The only commonality is a log entry by samba that seems to correlate with >>> both occurrences: >>> >>> [2008/12/08 01:02:52, 0] lib/util_sock.c:read_data(534) >>> read_data: read failure for 4 bytes to client 192.168.100.128. Error = No route to host >>> >>> .128 is the Windows client machine (connected via a stable GigE link), >>> which I shut down pretty much exactly 30 minutes before that (any 30 >>> minute timeouts in the kernel/network stack?). Both instances of these log >>> entries correlate with the CPU spikes which I noticed in my MRTG graphs. >>> >>> Any suspects or ideas? >>> >>> thanks >>> Holger >> >> Please bisect. > > I would love to try, but this is my "production server" (i.e. I need it > for real work) and I'll be traveling the next few days. I will try to > bisect after that (if nobody else has any ideas) but will have to make > sure the bug is actually reproducible after the timeout - for now I only > observed it by accident (via mrtg). > In the meantime maybe someone else will observe it as well. > > thanks > Holger >
Added Cc: netdev, readded all other Cc's, quoted in full for netdev. Good luck, -- Stefan Richter -=====-==--- ==-- -=--- http://arcgraph.de/sr/
| |