From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, samba@lists.samba.org,
linux-cifs-client@lists.samba.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.31-rc8: CIFS with 5 seconds hiccups
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 15:33:47 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090910153347.2f2616e8@barsoom.rdu.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0909101419310.29762@V090114053VZO-1>
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:53:12 -0400 (EDT)
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Jeff Layton wrote:
>
> > Well, I can see the delays in the capture, but the snarflen for the
> > capture is a little too small to tell much else. Can you redo the
> > capture with a larger snarflen (maybe -s 512 or so)?
>
> -s 1000 version attached.
>
> > Also, were you able to tell anything from a server-side capture? Is the
> > server issuing oplock breaks at those times?
>
> Thats a pretty busy system. They have not gotten around to do any logging
> on that end.
Ok. I had a look at the capture. The stalls seem to be occurring on
FIND_FILE requests. Those are similar to READDIRPLUS requests in NFS,
it returns a list of files that match a particular set of criteria and
their attributes.
Each time the client is making one of these calls to the server, it
requests a set of up to 150 files. The server grinds for 5s each time
and then responds.
The calls themselves seem to be sane AFAICT. I don't see any problems
with the parameters we're sending for the search. I also had a look
over the FIND_FIRST code and it doesn't seem to have any obvious
word size related problems.
I assume that the 32 and 64 bit clients you have are calling "ls" in
the same dir. If so, maybe a similar capture from a 64-bit client might
help us see the difference?
Thanks,
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-10 19:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-04 16:27 Christoph Lameter
2009-09-05 11:10 ` Jeff Layton
2009-09-09 16:33 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-09-09 16:53 ` Jeff Layton
2009-09-09 17:07 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-09-09 17:20 ` Jeff Layton
2009-09-09 17:28 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-09-09 18:02 ` Jeff Layton
2009-09-09 21:27 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-09-10 0:55 ` Jeff Layton
2009-09-10 18:53 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-09-10 19:33 ` Jeff Layton [this message]
2009-09-10 19:42 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-09-10 20:57 ` Jeff Layton
2009-09-10 21:27 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-09-11 0:19 ` Jeff Layton
2009-09-14 20:10 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-09-15 22:34 ` Jeff Layton
2009-09-16 16:26 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-09-18 14:24 ` Jeff Layton
2009-09-14 20:16 ` (64 bit dump) " Christoph Lameter
2009-09-10 21:42 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-09-09 17:33 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-09-09 17:57 ` Jeff Layton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090910153347.2f2616e8@barsoom.rdu.redhat.com \
--to=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-cifs-client@lists.samba.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=samba@lists.samba.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®