CIFS - VFS error question

CIFS - VFS error question

[ROBIN CERNIN]

Hello,

First of all I wanna say you are doing great job developing cif-utils.
Secondly I have question on using following version of cifs:

filename:       /lib/modules/2.6.18-308.8.1.
el5/kernel/fs/cifs/cifs.ko
version:        1.60RH
description:    VFS to access servers complying with the SNIA CIFS
Specification e.g. Samba and Windows
license:        GPL
author:         Steve French <sfrench-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
srcversion:     63D9396D38F380652744D7E
depends:
vermagic:       2.6.18-308.8.1.el5 SMP mod_unload gcc-4.1
parm:           CIFSMaxBufSize:Network buffer size (not including
header). Default: 16384 Range: 8192 to 130048 (int)
parm:           cifs_min_rcv:Network buffers in pool. Default: 4
Range: 1 to 64 (int)
parm:           cifs_min_small:Small network buffers in pool. Default:
30 Range: 2 to 256 (int)
parm:           cifs_max_pending:Simultaneous requests to server.
Default: 50 Range: 2 to 256 (int)
module_sig:    883f3504fa440f6a462ac2afa8e12f112b2f409f6ea4176acbbe7f2f2c13e944e9a17d507b429c09c8e9ef6118eb3d5c40fcbfa81c96bf86e626c06e

on RHEL get following errors in the /var/log/messages:

Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39222
Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39231
Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39236
Sep 25 10:45:16 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: Send error in SessSetup = -5
Sep 25 10:45:16 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: Unexpected lookup error -5
Sep 25 13:08:25 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 6 mid 47208
Sep 25 16:50:27 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 162 mid 48857
Sep 25 20:07:37 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 50442


Can you please clarify a bit to me what are these errors related to? I
dont hear anyone complaing that this isnt working but I can still see
these errors.

Thank you in advanced,
Best Regards,
Robin Cernin

Re: CIFS - VFS error question

[Steve French]

Command 50 (which apparently timed out when the server did not
respond) is "Transact 2" which is used for multiple purposes (looking
up file names, listing directory contents - among others) so is hard
to speculate about.

After disconnecting from the server, the client retried and got a
generic "EIO" error.

Although RedHat does update their kernel with bugfixes, this kernel is
almost six years old - do you get this error with a more recent
kernel?

What is the server type?

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:33 AM, ROBIN CERNIN <cerninr-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> First of all I wanna say you are doing great job developing cif-utils.
> Secondly I have question on using following version of cifs:
>
> filename:       /lib/modules/2.6.18-308.8.1.
> el5/kernel/fs/cifs/cifs.ko
> version:        1.60RH
> description:    VFS to access servers complying with the SNIA CIFS
> Specification e.g. Samba and Windows
> license:        GPL
> author:         Steve French <sfrench-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> srcversion:     63D9396D38F380652744D7E
> depends:
> vermagic:       2.6.18-308.8.1.el5 SMP mod_unload gcc-4.1
> parm:           CIFSMaxBufSize:Network buffer size (not including
> header). Default: 16384 Range: 8192 to 130048 (int)
> parm:           cifs_min_rcv:Network buffers in pool. Default: 4
> Range: 1 to 64 (int)
> parm:           cifs_min_small:Small network buffers in pool. Default:
> 30 Range: 2 to 256 (int)
> parm:           cifs_max_pending:Simultaneous requests to server.
> Default: 50 Range: 2 to 256 (int)
> module_sig:    883f3504fa440f6a462ac2afa8e12f112b2f409f6ea4176acbbe7f2f2c13e944e9a17d507b429c09c8e9ef6118eb3d5c40fcbfa81c96bf86e626c06e
>
> on RHEL get following errors in the /var/log/messages:
>
> Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39222
> Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39231
> Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39236
> Sep 25 10:45:16 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: Send error in SessSetup = -5
> Sep 25 10:45:16 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: Unexpected lookup error -5
> Sep 25 13:08:25 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 6 mid 47208
> Sep 25 16:50:27 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 162 mid 48857
> Sep 25 20:07:37 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 50442
>
>
> Can you please clarify a bit to me what are these errors related to? I
> dont hear anyone complaing that this isnt working but I can still see
> these errors.
>
> Thank you in advanced,
> Best Regards,
> Robin Cernin
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



-- 
Thanks,

Steve

Re: CIFS - VFS error question

[Sachin Prabhu]

On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 09:33 +0200, ROBIN CERNIN wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> First of all I wanna say you are doing great job developing cif-utils.
> Secondly I have question on using following version of cifs:
> 
> filename:       /lib/modules/2.6.18-308.8.1.
> el5/kernel/fs/cifs/cifs.ko
> version:        1.60RH
> description:    VFS to access servers complying with the SNIA CIFS
> Specification e.g. Samba and Windows
> license:        GPL
> author:         Steve French <sfrench-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> srcversion:     63D9396D38F380652744D7E
> depends:
> vermagic:       2.6.18-308.8.1.el5 SMP mod_unload gcc-4.1
> parm:           CIFSMaxBufSize:Network buffer size (not including
> header). Default: 16384 Range: 8192 to 130048 (int)
> parm:           cifs_min_rcv:Network buffers in pool. Default: 4
> Range: 1 to 64 (int)
> parm:           cifs_min_small:Small network buffers in pool. Default:
> 30 Range: 2 to 256 (int)
> parm:           cifs_max_pending:Simultaneous requests to server.
> Default: 50 Range: 2 to 256 (int)
> module_sig:    883f3504fa440f6a462ac2afa8e12f112b2f409f6ea4176acbbe7f2f2c13e944e9a17d507b429c09c8e9ef6118eb3d5c40fcbfa81c96bf86e626c06e
> 
> on RHEL get following errors in the /var/log/messages:
> 
> Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39222
> Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39231
> Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39236
> Sep 25 10:45:16 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: Send error in SessSetup = -5
> Sep 25 10:45:16 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: Unexpected lookup error -5
> Sep 25 13:08:25 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 6 mid 47208
> Sep 25 16:50:27 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 162 mid 48857
> Sep 25 20:07:37 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 50442
> 
> 
> Can you please clarify a bit to me what are these errors related to? I
> dont hear anyone complaing that this isnt working but I can still see
> these errors.
Hi Robin, 

Did you have any network outages or network congestion at those times?
It appears the client for some reason couldn't receive a response from
the server.

Sachin Prabhu

Re: CIFS - VFS error question

[ROBIN CERNIN]

Hi all,

thank you for great communication with you, I was not hoping that
someone will actually answer me.
This looks to me that we are not yet doomed:)

and anyway where is the network in perfect condition...am I right? :-)
however I am not aware of any outage, depending how much network this
needs. Packets are lost here and there everyday...
This doesn't seems to be a trouble problem as nobody is complaining
but this bothers me because it fills my /var/log/messages and informs
me every time. I first saw these messages and didn't find any
explanation for them. I thought that it would be nice to have a
comments on the errors so if also other people get error they can look
it up in Wiki or somewhere.

I think that in the Internet are plenty of questions but not real answers.
And to be it reliable message I though you guys could make something
because you are the ones who can:)

Steve already explained very nicely "cmd 50 response" which is time
out on listing files, directories and others. Which i know can occur
in network disturbance.

Here are again the errors still getting:
 kernel:  CIFS VFS: Send error in Close = -11.
 kernel:  CIFS VFS: Send error in SessSetup = -5.
 kernel:  CIFS VFS: Unexpected lookup error -6.

I have not checked running CIFS on newer kernel version yet. I ll have
to find some servers first.
I thought this is something that I could ignore or filter from my
messages as this I thought may be let's say access denied or
connection closed by other side but again if I do that I just think if
i m not going to miss some big problem then.

Thank you all,

Best Regards,
Robin Cernin

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Sachin Prabhu <sprabhu-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 09:33 +0200, ROBIN CERNIN wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> First of all I wanna say you are doing great job developing cif-utils.
>> Secondly I have question on using following version of cifs:
>>
>> filename:       /lib/modules/2.6.18-308.8.1.
>> el5/kernel/fs/cifs/cifs.ko
>> version:        1.60RH
>> description:    VFS to access servers complying with the SNIA CIFS
>> Specification e.g. Samba and Windows
>> license:        GPL
>> author:         Steve French <sfrench-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
>> srcversion:     63D9396D38F380652744D7E
>> depends:
>> vermagic:       2.6.18-308.8.1.el5 SMP mod_unload gcc-4.1
>> parm:           CIFSMaxBufSize:Network buffer size (not including
>> header). Default: 16384 Range: 8192 to 130048 (int)
>> parm:           cifs_min_rcv:Network buffers in pool. Default: 4
>> Range: 1 to 64 (int)
>> parm:           cifs_min_small:Small network buffers in pool. Default:
>> 30 Range: 2 to 256 (int)
>> parm:           cifs_max_pending:Simultaneous requests to server.
>> Default: 50 Range: 2 to 256 (int)
>> module_sig:    883f3504fa440f6a462ac2afa8e12f112b2f409f6ea4176acbbe7f2f2c13e944e9a17d507b429c09c8e9ef6118eb3d5c40fcbfa81c96bf86e626c06e
>>
>> on RHEL get following errors in the /var/log/messages:
>>
>> Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39222
>> Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39231
>> Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39236
>> Sep 25 10:45:16 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: Send error in SessSetup = -5
>> Sep 25 10:45:16 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: Unexpected lookup error -5
>> Sep 25 13:08:25 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 6 mid 47208
>> Sep 25 16:50:27 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 162 mid 48857
>> Sep 25 20:07:37 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 50442
>>
>>
>> Can you please clarify a bit to me what are these errors related to? I
>> dont hear anyone complaing that this isnt working but I can still see
>> these errors.
> Hi Robin,
>
> Did you have any network outages or network congestion at those times?
> It appears the client for some reason couldn't receive a response from
> the server.
>
> Sachin Prabhu
>

Re: CIFS - VFS error question

[Jeff Layton]

On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:37:09 +0100
Sachin Prabhu <sprabhu-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 09:33 +0200, ROBIN CERNIN wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > First of all I wanna say you are doing great job developing cif-utils.
> > Secondly I have question on using following version of cifs:
> > 
> > filename:       /lib/modules/2.6.18-308.8.1.
> > el5/kernel/fs/cifs/cifs.ko
> > version:        1.60RH
> > description:    VFS to access servers complying with the SNIA CIFS
> > Specification e.g. Samba and Windows
> > license:        GPL
> > author:         Steve French <sfrench-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> > srcversion:     63D9396D38F380652744D7E
> > depends:
> > vermagic:       2.6.18-308.8.1.el5 SMP mod_unload gcc-4.1
> > parm:           CIFSMaxBufSize:Network buffer size (not including
> > header). Default: 16384 Range: 8192 to 130048 (int)
> > parm:           cifs_min_rcv:Network buffers in pool. Default: 4
> > Range: 1 to 64 (int)
> > parm:           cifs_min_small:Small network buffers in pool. Default:
> > 30 Range: 2 to 256 (int)
> > parm:           cifs_max_pending:Simultaneous requests to server.
> > Default: 50 Range: 2 to 256 (int)
> > module_sig:    883f3504fa440f6a462ac2afa8e12f112b2f409f6ea4176acbbe7f2f2c13e944e9a17d507b429c09c8e9ef6118eb3d5c40fcbfa81c96bf86e626c06e
> > 
> > on RHEL get following errors in the /var/log/messages:
> > 
> > Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39222
> > Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39231
> > Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39236
> > Sep 25 10:45:16 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: Send error in SessSetup = -5
> > Sep 25 10:45:16 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: Unexpected lookup error -5
> > Sep 25 13:08:25 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 6 mid 47208
> > Sep 25 16:50:27 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 162 mid 48857
> > Sep 25 20:07:37 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 50442
> > 

As Steve pointed out the above indicates a lot of timed-out requests.
The EIO errors however are somewhat troubling. It's not clear what
would have caused that...

> > 
> > Can you please clarify a bit to me what are these errors related to? I
> > dont hear anyone complaing that this isnt working but I can still see
> > these errors.
> Hi Robin, 
> 
> Did you have any network outages or network congestion at those times?
> It appears the client for some reason couldn't receive a response from
> the server.
> 
> Sachin Prabhu
> 

It's not uncommon for windows servers to take a long time to respond to
certain types of requests. For instance, writes that are long past the
EOF can take *minutes*. NTFS doesn't do sparse files efficiently and
has to zero-fill the gaps before it replies.

More recent kernels (including RHEL6) implement a different mechanism
for timing out requests that's more resilient in the face of this sort
of server behavior. RHEL5 however is approaching its end of life, and
backporting something that invasive is probably a non-starter.

If you have a RH support contract, you may want to open a case so we
can help you do some better diagnosis.

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>

Re: CIFS - VFS error question

[ROBIN CERNIN]

Hi,

this problem as you said looks like that disturbance in network that
disconnects the CIFS share and server is trying to write to it when
its disconnected. We will see if the automated script that tries to
remount the CIFS share automatically when network disturbance
disconnects it will help...

I am very satisfied with RHEL 5, we dont need case for this as small
script could fix this.
I am not bothered about time outs as these seems not to be problem at
all. Also we have our own apps that runs on RHEL 5 and are written for
it especially.

and thanks Steve for explaining.

Thank you and appreciate your help,
with Best Regards, Robin


On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:37:09 +0100
> Sachin Prabhu <sprabhu-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 09:33 +0200, ROBIN CERNIN wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > First of all I wanna say you are doing great job developing cif-utils.
>> > Secondly I have question on using following version of cifs:
>> >
>> > filename:       /lib/modules/2.6.18-308.8.1.
>> > el5/kernel/fs/cifs/cifs.ko
>> > version:        1.60RH
>> > description:    VFS to access servers complying with the SNIA CIFS
>> > Specification e.g. Samba and Windows
>> > license:        GPL
>> > author:         Steve French <sfrench-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
>> > srcversion:     63D9396D38F380652744D7E
>> > depends:
>> > vermagic:       2.6.18-308.8.1.el5 SMP mod_unload gcc-4.1
>> > parm:           CIFSMaxBufSize:Network buffer size (not including
>> > header). Default: 16384 Range: 8192 to 130048 (int)
>> > parm:           cifs_min_rcv:Network buffers in pool. Default: 4
>> > Range: 1 to 64 (int)
>> > parm:           cifs_min_small:Small network buffers in pool. Default:
>> > 30 Range: 2 to 256 (int)
>> > parm:           cifs_max_pending:Simultaneous requests to server.
>> > Default: 50 Range: 2 to 256 (int)
>> > module_sig:    883f3504fa440f6a462ac2afa8e12f112b2f409f6ea4176acbbe7f2f2c13e944e9a17d507b429c09c8e9ef6118eb3d5c40fcbfa81c96bf86e626c06e
>> >
>> > on RHEL get following errors in the /var/log/messages:
>> >
>> > Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39222
>> > Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39231
>> > Sep 24 20:08:48 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 39236
>> > Sep 25 10:45:16 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: Send error in SessSetup = -5
>> > Sep 25 10:45:16 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: Unexpected lookup error -5
>> > Sep 25 13:08:25 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 6 mid 47208
>> > Sep 25 16:50:27 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 162 mid 48857
>> > Sep 25 20:07:37 xxxxxxx kernel:  CIFS VFS: No response for cmd 50 mid 50442
>> >
>
> As Steve pointed out the above indicates a lot of timed-out requests.
> The EIO errors however are somewhat troubling. It's not clear what
> would have caused that...
>
>> >
>> > Can you please clarify a bit to me what are these errors related to? I
>> > dont hear anyone complaing that this isnt working but I can still see
>> > these errors.
>> Hi Robin,
>>
>> Did you have any network outages or network congestion at those times?
>> It appears the client for some reason couldn't receive a response from
>> the server.
>>
>> Sachin Prabhu
>>
>
> It's not uncommon for windows servers to take a long time to respond to
> certain types of requests. For instance, writes that are long past the
> EOF can take *minutes*. NTFS doesn't do sparse files efficiently and
> has to zero-fill the gaps before it replies.
>
> More recent kernels (including RHEL6) implement a different mechanism
> for timing out requests that's more resilient in the face of this sort
> of server behavior. RHEL5 however is approaching its end of life, and
> backporting something that invasive is probably a non-starter.
>
> If you have a RH support contract, you may want to open a case so we
> can help you do some better diagnosis.
>
> --
> Jeff Layton <jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>