From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Pearson Subject: Re: [NFS] Re: Busy inodes after unmount followed by Oops Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 16:51:30 +0100 Sender: autofs-bounces@linux.kernel.org Message-ID: <40B21A02.63C4536B@moving-picture.com> References: <3FFE8B28.1E645E4E@moving-picture.com> <40AE23DC.6C240DAE@moving-picture.com> <1085157843.3666.75.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <40AE3532.8EBA0D7B@moving-picture.com> <20040522130457.GB15564@sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: autofs-bounces@linux.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Greg Banks Cc: autofs@linux.kernel.org, nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Greg Banks wrote: > > On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 05:58:26PM +0100, James Pearson wrote: > > Not quite sure what you mean by this - I had tried Greg's patch > > (http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-nfs&m=107604754127538&w=2) > > previously - but it made no difference in my case. The kernel I'm using > > now has both Greg's patch and Ian's recent autofs4 patch. > > The error message and subsequent oops are both generic symptoms and > could come from any kind of race with umount which causes a dentry > or inode reference count leak, not just the particular one in NFS > which I fixed. There could well be another NFS bug like this, or > one in autofs. Ian's patch may have fixed it, hidden it, or just > stopped tickling it. > > The only way to tell for sure is to modify the code that generates > the message to BUG() instead and use a kernel debugger to figure out > what has gone wrong. Note that using a debugger at oops time is > already too late. > > James, are you able to reproduce this at will? Unfortunately not. It proved impossible to reproduce in a 'controlled' way - however since using the latest autofs4 patch we haven't had the problem. Given that, I'm happy with the situation as it stands. James Pearson