Re: NFS regression in 2.6 -- gnome problem

[Tupshin Harper]

Andries Brouwer wrote:

> It should be. But it isnt. I propose the following patch
> (with whitespace damage):
>
> diff -u --recursive --new-file -X /linux/dontdiff a/fs/nfs/dir.c b/fs/nfs/dir.c
> --- a/fs/nfs/dir.c      Fri Jul 11 00:35:26 2003
> +++ b/fs/nfs/dir.c      Wed Aug 20 22:38:42 2003
> @@ -671,8 +671,10 @@
>        dentry->d_op = &nfs_dentry_operations;
>
>        /* If we're doing an exclusive create, optimize away the lookup */
> -       if (nfs_is_exclusive_create(dir, nd))
> +       if (nfs_is_exclusive_create(dir, nd)) {
> +               d_add(dentry, NULL);
>                return NULL;
> +       }
>
>        lock_kernel();
>        error = nfs_cached_lookup(dir, dentry, &fhandle, &fattr);
>
> Andries
>
>  
This patch makes the previously posted test work for me, but I'm 
experiencing a differenct NFS regression between 2.4 and 2.6. Whatever 
locking method that gnome2 is using when running home directories over 
nfs is failing when the client is running 2.6. Tried it again, using 
2.6.0-test3 + the above patch, and the results are the same. Gnome 
reports that it failed to lock it's test file, and aborts. It says that 
the error was "no locks available", but I'm not sure whether to believe 
that or not. The only differece is booting between 2.4.x and 2.6.x, and 
it doesn't matter whether the server is running 2.4 or 2.6. Any suggestions?

-Tupshin

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