[271] in The Cryptographic File System users list

home help back first fref pref prev next nref lref last post

Problems with Redhat 7.3 (2.4.18-10smp) ?

daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Stefan Hudson)
Thu Sep 12 22:13:25 2002

From owner-cfs-users@crypto.com Fri Sep 13 02:13:25 2002
Return-Path: <owner-cfs-users@crypto.com>
Delivered-To: cfs-mtg@CHARON.mit.edu
Received: (qmail 26971 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2002 02:13:24 -0000
Received: from mx.crypto.com (207.140.168.138)
  by charon.mit.edu with SMTP; 13 Sep 2002 02:13:24 -0000
Received: (from majordomo@localhost)
	by MultiHostMXServer (8.9.3/8.9.x4) id WAA27578
	for cfs-users-list; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 22:00:31 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from dockmaster.research.att.com (H-135-207-24-155.research.att.com [135.207.24.155])
	by MultiHostMXServer (8.9.3/8.9.x4) with ESMTP id WAA18355
	for <cfs-users@crypto.com>; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 22:00:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mail-blue.research.att.com (mail-blue.research.att.com [135.207.30.102])
	by dockmaster.research.att.com (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id g8D1QRxi023336
	for <cfs-users@nsa.research.att.com>; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 21:26:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix)
	id C46194CFE5; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 21:59:59 -0400 (EDT)
Delivered-To: cfs-users@research.att.com
Received: from janus (fpfw.research.att.com [135.207.1.2])
	by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 7A6614CEDD
	for <cfs-users@research.att.com>; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 21:59:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mail-red.research.att.com ([192.20.225.110]) by janus; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 21:57:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from postfixfilter@localhost)
	by mail-red.research.att.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g8D20Im00954
	for cfs-users@research.att.com; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 22:00:18 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: mail-red.research.att.com: postfixfilter set sender to hudson@otter.mbay.net using -f
Received: from otter.mbay.net (otter.mbay.net [206.55.237.2])
	by mail-red.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A5AE1AB4B8
	for <cfs-users@research.att.com>; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 22:00:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from otter.mbay.net (mail@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by otter.mbay.net (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id g8D1xuEw019084
	for <cfs-users@research.att.com>; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 18:59:56 -0700
Received: (from hudson@localhost)
	by otter.mbay.net (8.12.1/8.12.1/Submit) id g8D1xu15019083
	for cfs-users@research.att.com; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 18:59:56 -0700
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 18:59:56 -0700
From: Stefan Hudson <hudson@mbay.net>
To: cfs-users@research.att.com
Subject: Problems with Redhat 7.3 (2.4.18-10smp) ?
Message-ID: <20020912185956.A17496@mbay.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.6i
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=SUBJ_ENDS_IN_Q_MARK version=2.20
X-Spam-Level: 
Sender: owner-cfs-users@crypto.com
Precedence: bulk

Greetings,

Does anyone know of a way to get CFS to work under Redhat 7.3?  I just
rebuilt a system (was running 7.2 before), and now CFS is causing kernel
error messages when I mount the /crypt partition, and occasional kernel
panics when I perform an extended directory listing.

When I mount /crypt, I get this:
call_verify: server accept status: 2
call_verify: server accept status: 2
call_verify: server accept status: 2
RPC: garbage, exit EIO
nfs_get_root: getattr error = 5

Even with these errors, the directory entries are readable (using a simple
"ls"), but anything that examines inode information (ls -l) generates a
message like this to the console:
init_special_inode: bogus imode (35504)
nfs_refresh_inode: inode number mismatch
expected (0x9/0x40000001f0), got (0x9/0x1)
init_special_inode: bogus imode (1202)
nfs_refresh_inode: inode number mismatch
expected (0x9/0xe0a1af60e0a0e1b9), got (0x9/0x1)
init_special_inode: bogus imode (1202)
nfs_refresh_inode: inode number mismatch
expected (0x9/0xe0a1af60e0a0e1b9), got (0x9/0x1)

and various variations on this theme.  "ls" shows an I/O error
for each entry in the directory.

Any ideas before I downgrade back to 7.2?

For what it's worth, the version I was using under 7.2 was probably
not compiled under 7.2.

Thanks, Stefan


home help back first fref pref prev next nref lref last post