Hi, On 08/29/2016 08:30 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote: > Ha, yep, that's one of the bugs Giancolo found: > > ceph version 10.2.1 (3a66dd4f30852819c1bdaa8ec23c795d4ad77269) > 1: (()+0x299152) [0x7f91398dc152] > 2: (()+0x10330) [0x7f9138bbb330] > 3: (Client::get_root_ino()+0x10) [0x7f91397df6c0] > 4: (CephFuse::Handle::make_fake_ino(inodeno_t, snapid_t)+0x175) > [0x7f91397dd3d5] > 5: (()+0x19ac09) [0x7f91397ddc09] > 6: (()+0x14b45) [0x7f91391f7b45] > 7: (()+0x1522b) [0x7f91391f822b] > 8: (()+0x11e49) [0x7f91391f4e49] > 9: (()+0x8184) [0x7f9138bb3184] > 10: (clone()+0x6d) [0x7f913752237d] > NOTE: a copy of the executable, or `objdump -rdS <executable>` is > needed to interpret this. > > > So I that'll be in the next Jewel release if it's not already fixed in 10.2.2. If I see the previous message of Goncalo in this thread, the bug still exists in Jewel 10.2.2 so I deduce that it will be fixed in the 10.2.3. Can you tell me where is the report of this specific bug in http://tracker.ceph.com ? I have not found it. Thanks. François Lafont _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |