Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Sep 9, 2008, at Sep 9, 2008, 2:20 PM, ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> If the upper layers are responsible for providing the utsname, you will need >>> to >>> fix up lockd and the NFS server's callback client too, at least. >> >> Actually looking at the code. It looks like a proper fix may be even simpler. >> Why do we have both clnt->cl_server and clnt->cl_nodename? Or is cl_server >> the other side of the connection? > > cl_server is the server-side. cl_nodename is the "machine name" of the client. Thanks, Darn. Looks like we need to capture both names at the same or a similar point. I'm wondering if we need to capture a network namespace as well. >>> I don't like the idea of an oops in here. Instead, (for now) it should warn >>> and >>> fail to create the client, IMO. >> >> Which is interesting when the problem happens during NFS unmount. Although >> frankly it could fail anyway. >> >> It seems strange that we are creating a client during unmount anyway. > > It's worth investigating. Just enable RPC tracing (/usr/sbin/rpcdebug -m rpc -s > all) before shutting down the client. > > NFS unmounting is historically difficult because during a system shutdown, > unmounting is the last thing to occur, and usually happens after most system > services (such as the portmapper service) have become unavailable. That's fine > for local file systems, but it makes for a rather dodgy situation for NFS. Interesting. Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
