2010/9/13 Steve French <smfrench@xxxxxxxxx>: > As this only takes two clients this is fairly easy to test (and prove > Windows to Windows behavior). I took v2.6.37 CIFS client + strictcache patches and Windows 7 and found out that Jeff was right. The _should_ set OplockLevel on OplockBreakAcknowledge. I attached python script that shows the problem with 2 captures: non-patched.pcap and patched.pcap. 'patched' one I got after I apply simple patch that set OplockLevel on OplockBreakAcknoledge, On the captures, we can see that the server send oplock break to one client on non-patched variant and to both clients on patched one. That's why I think our oplock handling code is incorrect now. I am going to prepare it to post to the list soon. -- Best regards, Pavel Shilovsky.
#!/bin/env python
#
# We have to mount the same share to test, test1, test2 directories that locate in the directory we
# execute this script from.
from os import open, close, O_RDWR, O_CREAT, write, read, O_RDONLY, O_WRONLY, O_TRUNC, lseek, SEEK_END, SEEK_SET
import time
f = open('test/_test4321_', O_RDWR | O_CREAT | O_TRUNC)
close(f)
f1 = open('test1/_test4321_', O_RDWR)
write(f1, 'a')
lseek(f1, 0, 0)
assert('a' == read(f1, 1))
f2 = open('test2/_test4321_', O_WRONLY)
write(f2, 'x')
lseek(f1, 0, 0)
time.sleep(0.1) #need to wait untill a server breaks oplock from the previous write
assert('x' == read(f1, 1))
print 'OK'
close(f1)
close(f2)
Attachment:
non-patched.pcap
Description: Binary data
Attachment:
patched.pcap
Description: Binary data
