Re: Problem of concurrent mount/umount call

["Erwan Loaëc" <erwan.loaec@cgin.fr>]

Sorry for my previous mail with missing parts...


Ian Kent wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 17:19 +0200, Erwan Loaëc wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Sorry for the time, but before posting again I've upgrade every 
>> production servers with newest autofs4 module (with last patch) and last 
> 
> What does "newest autofs4 module" mean exactly?


Yes it is not the "newest module" but the module recompiled with the 
patch autofs4-2.6.26-v5-update-20090903.patch

> 
>> automount with all patch EXCEPT these:
>>
>> autofs-5.0.5-fix-restart.patch
>> autofs-5.0.5-fix-status-privilege-error.patch
>> autofs-5.0.4-always-read-file-maps-mount-lookup-map-read-fix.patch
>> autofs-5.0.5-fix-direct-map-not-updating-on-reread.patch
>> autofs-5.0.5-add-external-bind-method.patch
>> autofs-5.0.5-fix-add-simple-bind-auth.patch
>> autofs-5.0.5-add-dump-maps-option.patch
>> autofs-5.0.5-fix-submount-shutdown-wait.patch
>>
>>
>> Today I had the same behaviour than the issue explained my previous mail.
>>
>> --------------------
>> Oct 22 16:44:06 SERVERNAME automount[2665]: umount_autofs_offset: 
>> couldn't get ioctl fd for offset /cifs/XXXXXXX/volume: No such file or 
>> directory
>> Oct 22 16:44:06 SERVERNAME automount[2665]: 
>> handle_packet_missing_direct:1363: can't find map entry for (20,3548545)
>> --------------------
> 
> This could be caused by a umount returning success when in fact it
> didn't succeed with the umount. Are you sure umount is returning correct
> status?

Unfortunaly the last case occured on production server with debug 
disable. I can't find more information in logfile...

But, as I've explained in my previous mail, this could logical with the 
bad sequence found in my previous case:

*Call to the share /cifs/XXXXXXX/volume
*Mount /cifs/XXXXXXX/volume expiring
*New call to the share /cifs/XXXXXXX/volume
*Umount /cifs/XXXXXXX/volume

In this case, obviously the umount fail because the mount is "in use".

The other problem is the total freeze of the filesystem calls to 
/cifs/... All IO are blocked since automount is killed/start.

> 
>> Do you know if it should be fixed with the patch I've not already apply ?
> 
> Doubt it.
> I think it's either a kernel or status return from umount problem.
> 
>> Server where issue occurs today:
>> kernel: 2.6.26-2-amd64
>> autofs 5.0.5
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> --
>> Erwan
>>
>>
>> Ian Kent wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2010-09-20 at 09:58 +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2010-08-26 at 12:39 +0200, Erwan Loaëc wrote:
>>>>> Hello everybody!
>>>>>
>>>>> Versions used:
>>>>> - Autofs 5.0.5 with all patchs
>>>>> - Kernel 2.6.26-2-686
>>> This is going to get very difficult if you can't tell me what autofs
>>> patches have been applied to this kernel.
>>>
>>>>> /etc/auto.master:
>>>>> /cifs /etc/auto.cifs --timeout=60
>>>>>
>>>>> (the timeout is small to make easier to reproduce the issue after I've 
>>>>> enable debug)
>>>>>
>>>>> There is an issue which occurred regularly (in August, it happens 3 
>>>>> times). It seems that when a mount expires, and the same mount is called 
>>>>> a the "same" time, automount hangs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please take a look to my debug log (in attachment), this is the debug 
>>>>> log when the problem occurred.
>>>>>
>>>>> Scenario:
>>>>>
>>>>> Line 121 (10h10m40s) : Call to the share /cifs/SERV2/TM_termoz
>>>>> Line 351 (10h11m42s) : Mount /cifs/SERV2/TM_termoz expiring
>>>>> Line 356 (10h11m42s) : New call to the share /cifs/SERV2/TM_termoz
>>>>> Line 401 (10h11m42s) : Umount /cifs/SERV2/TM_termoz with error
>>>>>
>>>>> Then, obviously it cannot remove directory /cifs/SERV2
>>>>>
>>>>> The automount hangs after this, so each I/O on /cifs/SERV2/TM_termoz 
>>>>> hangs too...
>>>>>
>>>>> If you want to check debug file through your browser: 
>>>>> http://paste-it.net/public/n1e7286/
>>>> That looks like a particularly nasty bug.
>>>> I'll have to think about this one for a while and try and work out what
>>>> is happening.
>>>>
>>>>> Otherwise, attachment :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Is anyone has suggestions about my problem...
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>
[...CUT...]
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> autofs mailing list
>>>>> autofs@linux.kernel.org
>>>>> http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> autofs mailing list
>>>> autofs@linux.kernel.org
>>>> http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> autofs mailing list
>> autofs@linux.kernel.org
>> http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
autofs mailing list
autofs@linux.kernel.org
http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs