Bug#1069092: Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares
Hi, On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 06:35:06PM +, Kari Lempiäinen wrote: > Hi, > > Looks like this fixed the problem. I ran a couple of backup jobs to > cifs-mounted shares and no error messages so far. Thanks! Thanks for the confirmation! Regards, Salvatore
Bug#1069092: Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares
Hi, Looks like this fixed the problem. I ran a couple of backup jobs to cifs-mounted shares and no error messages so far. Thanks! Regards, Kari From: Salvatore Bonaccorso on behalf of Salvatore Bonaccorso Date: Tuesday, 7. May 2024 at 19.01 To: Kari Lempiäinen Cc: 1069...@bugs.debian.org <1069...@bugs.debian.org>, Manfred Larcher , 1069...@bugs.debian.org <1069...@bugs.debian.org> Subject: Re: Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares Hi, On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 03:30:58PM +, Kari Lempiäinen wrote: > Hi, > > New kernel 6.1.0-21 seems to be out. Could you verify if this bus is fixed in > it? > > I found from > https://mirrors.edge.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v6.x/ChangeLog-6.1.90 that > there is a commit b3686200adba26dd1f8beee3d9c1b34563db1e65 is that a fix for > this? I closed the bug in the changelog with it, with the testing case I had at hand. But please verify if that is the case as well in your setup. Can you then report back? Regards, Salvatore
Bug#1069092: Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares
Hi, On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 03:30:58PM +, Kari Lempiäinen wrote: > Hi, > > New kernel 6.1.0-21 seems to be out. Could you verify if this bus is fixed in > it? > > I found from > https://mirrors.edge.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v6.x/ChangeLog-6.1.90 that > there is a commit b3686200adba26dd1f8beee3d9c1b34563db1e65 is that a fix for > this? I closed the bug in the changelog with it, with the testing case I had at hand. But please verify if that is the case as well in your setup. Can you then report back? Regards, Salvatore
Bug#1069092: Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares
Hi, New kernel 6.1.0-21 seems to be out. Could you verify if this bus is fixed in it? I found from https://mirrors.edge.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v6.x/ChangeLog-6.1.90 that there is a commit b3686200adba26dd1f8beee3d9c1b34563db1e65 is that a fix for this? Regards, Kari From: Salvatore Bonaccorso on behalf of Salvatore Bonaccorso Date: Thursday, 18. April 2024 at 9.39 To: Kari Lempiäinen Cc: 1069...@bugs.debian.org <1069...@bugs.debian.org>, Manfred Larcher , 1069...@bugs.debian.org <1069...@bugs.debian.org> Subject: Re: Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares Hi Kari, On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 05:31:33AM +, Kari Lempiäinen wrote: > Hi, > > I think I spoke too soon. I removed 'noserverino' options from all > my cifs mounts yesterday and u/remounted them. From last night > syslog I can still find the "directory entry name would overflow > frame end of buf" entries. > > I have options like this in my fstab: > //mercury/backups/mnt/backups cifs > credentials=/etc/smbcredentials,uid=kari,gid=kari,_netdev,dir_mode=0775,file_mode=0775,noperm,vers=3.0 > 0 0 Thanks for reporting back! So it might be possible that the noserverino just makes the issue easier visible. If I would provide you a (unsigned!) kernel-image package with a tentative patch from upstream, asking for testing, could you boot one affected machine into it to verify if the problem is solved? Regards, Salvatore
Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares
Package: src:linux Version: 6.1.85-1 Followup-For: Bug #1069102 X-Debbugs-Cc: email4deb...@gmx.net Dear Maintainer, I noticed the same issue. I have a mount: mount -t cifs //XXX/Backups/borg-backup /mnt/backups -o noserverino,credentials=/etc/xxx,file_mode=0777,dir_mode=0777 -vvv In the mounted directory, a folder is missing. I can see the folder when I connect to the share via Dolphin. (This is a backup-drive and I noticed because borg-backup threw errors.) This is reproducible: after a reboot and mounting the share again, the same folder is missing and the other folders are shown. I build a kernel with the patch from #26, which I am running right now. The problem seems to be gone: borg-backup now runs cleanly. So I assume the mount is fine with the patch from #26. I could probably test a kernel if it installs on stable. Best, Mark. *** Reporter, please consider answering these questions, where appropriate *** * What led up to the situation? * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or ineffective)? * What was the outcome of this action? * What outcome did you expect instead? *** End of the template - remove these template lines *** -- Package-specific info: ** Kernel log: boot messages should be attached ** Model information sys_vendor: TUXEDO product_name: N24_25BU product_version: Not Applicable chassis_vendor: TUXEDO chassis_version: N/A bios_vendor: American Megatrends Inc. bios_version: 5.12 board_vendor: TUXEDO board_name: N24_25BU board_version: Not Applicable ** Network interface configuration: *** /etc/network/interfaces: source /etc/network/interfaces.d/* auto lo iface lo inet loopback ** PCI devices: 00:00.0 Host bridge [0600]: Intel Corporation Xeon E3-1200 v6/7th Gen Core Processor Host Bridge/DRAM Registers [8086:5904] (rev 02) Subsystem: CLEVO/KAPOK Computer Xeon E3-1200 v6/7th Gen Core Processor Host Bridge/DRAM Registers [1558:2410] Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx- Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- SERR- Kernel driver in use: skl_uncore 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: Intel Corporation HD Graphics 620 [8086:5916] (rev 02) (prog-if 00 [VGA controller]) Subsystem: CLEVO/KAPOK Computer HD Graphics 620 [1558:2410] Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx+ Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- SERR- Kernel driver in use: i915 Kernel modules: i915 00:08.0 System peripheral [0880]: Intel Corporation Xeon E3-1200 v5/v6 / E3-1500 v5 / 6th/7th/8th Gen Core Processor Gaussian Mixture Model [8086:1911] Subsystem: CLEVO/KAPOK Computer Xeon E3-1200 v5/v6 / E3-1500 v5 / 6th/7th/8th Gen Core Processor Gaussian Mixture Model [1558:2410] Control: I/O- Mem- BusMaster- SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx- Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- SERR- 00:14.0 USB controller [0c03]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP USB 3.0 xHCI Controller [8086:9d2f] (rev 21) (prog-if 30 [XHCI]) Subsystem: CLEVO/KAPOK Computer Sunrise Point-LP USB 3.0 xHCI Controller [1558:2410] Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx+ Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- SERR- Kernel driver in use: xhci_hcd Kernel modules: xhci_pci 00:14.2 Signal processing controller [1180]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP Thermal subsystem [8086:9d31] (rev 21) Subsystem: CLEVO/KAPOK Computer Sunrise Point-LP Thermal subsystem [1558:2410] Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster- SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx- Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- SERR- Kernel driver in use: intel_pch_thermal Kernel modules: intel_pch_thermal 00:16.0 Communication controller [0780]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP CSME HECI #1 [8086:9d3a] (rev 21) Subsystem: CLEVO/KAPOK Computer Sunrise Point-LP CSME HECI [1558:2410] Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx+ Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- SERR- Kernel driver in use: mei_me Kernel modules: mei_me 00:17.0 SATA controller [0106]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP SATA Controller [AHCI mode] [8086:9d03] (rev 21) (prog-if 01 [AHCI 1.0]) Subsystem: CLEVO/KAPOK Computer Sunrise Point-LP SATA Controller [AHCI mode] [1558:2410] Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx+ Status: Cap+ 66MHz+ UDF- FastB2B+
Bug#1069092: Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares
Hi, I probably could try it. The problem is that I don't have extra computer at the moment and I should do it on my main server. There is also a Virtualbox host running there, which needs to compile some parts of it every time the host kernel is updated. For that it needs kernel-headers. I assume that the fix you're talking about wouldn't affect Virtualbox itself, but if the kernel headers version differs from the "test" kernel, then Virtualbox won't start. If you can make "test" kernel so it matches my headers: ii linux-headers-6.1.0-20-amd64 6.1.85-1 amd64Header files for Linux 6.1.0-20-amd64 ii linux-headers-6.1.0-20-common 6.1.85-1 all Common header files for Linux 6.1.0-20 ii linux-headers-amd64 6.1.85-1 amd64Header files for Linux amd64 configuration (meta-package) I think I could probably try it. Also instructions to revert back is necessary Regards, Kari From: Salvatore Bonaccorso on behalf of Salvatore Bonaccorso Sent: 18 April 2024 09:39 To: Kari Lempiäinen Cc: 1069...@bugs.debian.org <1069...@bugs.debian.org>; Manfred Larcher ; 1069...@bugs.debian.org <1069...@bugs.debian.org> Subject: Re: Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares Hi Kari, On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 05:31:33AM +, Kari Lempiäinen wrote: > Hi, > > I think I spoke too soon. I removed 'noserverino' options from all > my cifs mounts yesterday and u/remounted them. From last night > syslog I can still find the "directory entry name would overflow > frame end of buf" entries. > > I have options like this in my fstab: > //mercury/backups/mnt/backups cifs > credentials=/etc/smbcredentials,uid=kari,gid=kari,_netdev,dir_mode=0775,file_mode=0775,noperm,vers=3.0 > 0 0 Thanks for reporting back! So it might be possible that the noserverino just makes the issue easier visible. If I would provide you a (unsigned!) kernel-image package with a tentative patch from upstream, asking for testing, could you boot one affected machine into it to verify if the problem is solved? Regards, Salvatore
Bug#1069092: Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares
Hi Kari, On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 05:31:33AM +, Kari Lempiäinen wrote: > Hi, > > I think I spoke too soon. I removed 'noserverino' options from all > my cifs mounts yesterday and u/remounted them. From last night > syslog I can still find the "directory entry name would overflow > frame end of buf" entries. > > I have options like this in my fstab: > //mercury/backups/mnt/backups cifs > credentials=/etc/smbcredentials,uid=kari,gid=kari,_netdev,dir_mode=0775,file_mode=0775,noperm,vers=3.0 > 0 0 Thanks for reporting back! So it might be possible that the noserverino just makes the issue easier visible. If I would provide you a (unsigned!) kernel-image package with a tentative patch from upstream, asking for testing, could you boot one affected machine into it to verify if the problem is solved? Regards, Salvatore
Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares
Hi, I think I spoke too soon. I removed 'noserverino' options from all my cifs mounts yesterday and u/remounted them. From last night syslog I can still find the "directory entry name would overflow frame end of buf" entries. I have options like this in my fstab: //mercury/backups/mnt/backups cifs credentials=/etc/smbcredentials,uid=kari,gid=kari,_netdev,dir_mode=0775,file_mode=0775,noperm,vers=3.0 0 0 Regards, Kari From: Kari Lempiäinen Sent: 17 April 2024 14:29 To: Salvatore Bonaccorso ; 1069...@bugs.debian.org <1069...@bugs.debian.org> Cc: Manfred Larcher ; 1069...@bugs.debian.org <1069...@bugs.debian.org>; sub...@bugs.debian.org Subject: Re: Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares Hi, I can confirm that removing the 'noserverino' mount option fixed the problem for me. Unfortunately, I don't have suitable environment at the moment for testing kernel-fixes... Best regads, Kari From: Salvatore Bonaccorso Sent: 16 April 2024 23:49 To: 1069...@bugs.debian.org <1069...@bugs.debian.org> Cc: Manfred Larcher ; 1069...@bugs.debian.org <1069...@bugs.debian.org>; Kari Lempiäinen ; sub...@bugs.debian.org Subject: Re: Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares Hi, On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 05:46:33PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > Control: tags -1 + moreinfo > > Hi > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 02:17:49PM +0200, Manfred Larcher wrote: > > Package: src:linux > > Version: 6.1.85-1 > > Severity: important > > > > Dear Maintainer, > > > >* What led up to the situation? > > kernel update from version 6.1.0-18 to 6.1.0-20 > > > >* What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or > > ineffective)? > > out system mounted a samba share via autofs (cifs) and we tried to access > > some files and directories > > > >* What was the outcome of this action? > > the mount point of our share is /srv/samba/shares/company and the directory > > it/MIJ had another directory "digitale kommunikation" which did not shop up > > on the computer which mounted the samba share. before the kernel update it > > did and when we renamed the file to "digitale_kommunikation" or to "digitalo > > kommunikation" we could see it. > > in the syslog we found the following messages: > > CIFS: VFS: directory entry name would overflow frame end of buf ... > > we could move that direcotry into another directory and it was useable, we > > created another directory it/abc and created the "digitale kommunikation" > > inside and it was hidden again. after switching back to kernel 6.1.0-20 > > everything was ok. > > upgrade to kernel 6.5.0-0.deb12.4-amd64 package was ok too. > > > >* What outcome did you expect instead? > > we expected to just see the "digitale kommunikation" directory as before. > > Can you share details on how the cifs mounts are done? Which mount > options are used? > > Were you able to find a minimal reproducing case which would help > debug the issue on non production systems? Can you confirm you are seeing the issue only if mounting with using 'noserverino' mount option? Would you be in the position of building a kernel with a commit reverted and verify the issue is gone with it? If you follow https://kernel-team.pages.debian.net/kernel-handbook/ch-common-tasks.html#id-1.6.6.4 with the attached patch, you should be able to get a kernel image to test with. Regards, Salvatore
Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares
Hi, I can confirm that removing the 'noserverino' mount option fixed the problem for me. Unfortunately, I don't have suitable environment at the moment for testing kernel-fixes... Best regads, Kari From: Salvatore Bonaccorso Sent: 16 April 2024 23:49 To: 1069...@bugs.debian.org <1069...@bugs.debian.org> Cc: Manfred Larcher ; 1069...@bugs.debian.org <1069...@bugs.debian.org>; Kari Lempiäinen ; sub...@bugs.debian.org Subject: Re: Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares Hi, On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 05:46:33PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > Control: tags -1 + moreinfo > > Hi > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 02:17:49PM +0200, Manfred Larcher wrote: > > Package: src:linux > > Version: 6.1.85-1 > > Severity: important > > > > Dear Maintainer, > > > >* What led up to the situation? > > kernel update from version 6.1.0-18 to 6.1.0-20 > > > >* What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or > > ineffective)? > > out system mounted a samba share via autofs (cifs) and we tried to access > > some files and directories > > > >* What was the outcome of this action? > > the mount point of our share is /srv/samba/shares/company and the directory > > it/MIJ had another directory "digitale kommunikation" which did not shop up > > on the computer which mounted the samba share. before the kernel update it > > did and when we renamed the file to "digitale_kommunikation" or to "digitalo > > kommunikation" we could see it. > > in the syslog we found the following messages: > > CIFS: VFS: directory entry name would overflow frame end of buf ... > > we could move that direcotry into another directory and it was useable, we > > created another directory it/abc and created the "digitale kommunikation" > > inside and it was hidden again. after switching back to kernel 6.1.0-20 > > everything was ok. > > upgrade to kernel 6.5.0-0.deb12.4-amd64 package was ok too. > > > >* What outcome did you expect instead? > > we expected to just see the "digitale kommunikation" directory as before. > > Can you share details on how the cifs mounts are done? Which mount > options are used? > > Were you able to find a minimal reproducing case which would help > debug the issue on non production systems? Can you confirm you are seeing the issue only if mounting with using 'noserverino' mount option? Would you be in the position of building a kernel with a commit reverted and verify the issue is gone with it? If you follow https://kernel-team.pages.debian.net/kernel-handbook/ch-common-tasks.html#id-1.6.6.4 with the attached patch, you should be able to get a kernel image to test with. Regards, Salvatore
Bug#1069092: Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares
On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 10:49:54PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 05:46:33PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > > Control: tags -1 + moreinfo > > > > Hi > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 02:17:49PM +0200, Manfred Larcher wrote: > > > Package: src:linux > > > Version: 6.1.85-1 > > > Severity: important > > > > > > Dear Maintainer, > > > > > >* What led up to the situation? > > > kernel update from version 6.1.0-18 to 6.1.0-20 > > > > > >* What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or > > > ineffective)? > > > out system mounted a samba share via autofs (cifs) and we tried to access > > > some files and directories > > > > > >* What was the outcome of this action? > > > the mount point of our share is /srv/samba/shares/company and the > > > directory > > > it/MIJ had another directory "digitale kommunikation" which did not shop > > > up > > > on the computer which mounted the samba share. before the kernel update it > > > did and when we renamed the file to "digitale_kommunikation" or to > > > "digitalo > > > kommunikation" we could see it. > > > in the syslog we found the following messages: > > > CIFS: VFS: directory entry name would overflow frame end of buf ... > > > we could move that direcotry into another directory and it was useable, we > > > created another directory it/abc and created the "digitale kommunikation" > > > inside and it was hidden again. after switching back to kernel 6.1.0-20 > > > everything was ok. > > > upgrade to kernel 6.5.0-0.deb12.4-amd64 package was ok too. > > > > > >* What outcome did you expect instead? > > > we expected to just see the "digitale kommunikation" directory as before. > > > > Can you share details on how the cifs mounts are done? Which mount > > options are used? > > > > Were you able to find a minimal reproducing case which would help > > debug the issue on non production systems? > > Can you confirm you are seeing the issue only if mounting with using > 'noserverino' mount option? > > Would you be in the position of building a kernel with a commit > reverted and verify the issue is gone with it? > > If you follow > https://kernel-team.pages.debian.net/kernel-handbook/ch-common-tasks.html#id-1.6.6.4 > with the attached patch, you should be able to get a kernel image to > test with. I'm able to reproduce the behaviour on a test machine, when using noserverino mount option, but I'm yet trying to further reduce the testcase to be able to report upstream. The issue happens as well already in 6.1.82. Regards, Salvatore
Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 05:46:33PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
>
> Hi
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 02:17:49PM +0200, Manfred Larcher wrote:
> > Package: src:linux
> > Version: 6.1.85-1
> > Severity: important
> >
> > Dear Maintainer,
> >
> >* What led up to the situation?
> > kernel update from version 6.1.0-18 to 6.1.0-20
> >
> >* What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or
> > ineffective)?
> > out system mounted a samba share via autofs (cifs) and we tried to access
> > some files and directories
> >
> >* What was the outcome of this action?
> > the mount point of our share is /srv/samba/shares/company and the directory
> > it/MIJ had another directory "digitale kommunikation" which did not shop up
> > on the computer which mounted the samba share. before the kernel update it
> > did and when we renamed the file to "digitale_kommunikation" or to "digitalo
> > kommunikation" we could see it.
> > in the syslog we found the following messages:
> > CIFS: VFS: directory entry name would overflow frame end of buf ...
> > we could move that direcotry into another directory and it was useable, we
> > created another directory it/abc and created the "digitale kommunikation"
> > inside and it was hidden again. after switching back to kernel 6.1.0-20
> > everything was ok.
> > upgrade to kernel 6.5.0-0.deb12.4-amd64 package was ok too.
> >
> >* What outcome did you expect instead?
> > we expected to just see the "digitale kommunikation" directory as before.
>
> Can you share details on how the cifs mounts are done? Which mount
> options are used?
>
> Were you able to find a minimal reproducing case which would help
> debug the issue on non production systems?
Can you confirm you are seeing the issue only if mounting with using
'noserverino' mount option?
Would you be in the position of building a kernel with a commit
reverted and verify the issue is gone with it?
If you follow
https://kernel-team.pages.debian.net/kernel-handbook/ch-common-tasks.html#id-1.6.6.4
with the attached patch, you should be able to get a kernel image to
test with.
Regards,
Salvatore
>From 00ab6d9874ba6adc3c8edb61c0a583e8e516ccbd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Salvatore Bonaccorso
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:46:24 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Revert "smb: client: set correct d_type for reparse points
under DFS mounts"
This reverts commit 0947d0d463d4e6fad75f3a3066613cb3d9689b26.
---
fs/smb/client/readdir.c | 15 +++
fs/smb/client/smb2pdu.c | 6 --
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/smb/client/readdir.c b/fs/smb/client/readdir.c
index 5990bdbae598..2d75ba5aaa8a 100644
--- a/fs/smb/client/readdir.c
+++ b/fs/smb/client/readdir.c
@@ -304,16 +304,14 @@ cifs_dir_info_to_fattr(struct cifs_fattr *fattr, FILE_DIRECTORY_INFO *info,
}
static void cifs_fulldir_info_to_fattr(struct cifs_fattr *fattr,
- const void *info,
+ SEARCH_ID_FULL_DIR_INFO *info,
struct cifs_sb_info *cifs_sb)
{
- const FILE_FULL_DIRECTORY_INFO *di = info;
-
__dir_info_to_fattr(fattr, info);
- /* See MS-FSCC 2.4.14, 2.4.19 */
+ /* See MS-FSCC 2.4.19 FileIdFullDirectoryInformation */
if (fattr->cf_cifsattrs & ATTR_REPARSE)
- fattr->cf_cifstag = le32_to_cpu(di->EaSize);
+ fattr->cf_cifstag = le32_to_cpu(info->EaSize);
cifs_fill_common_info(fattr, cifs_sb);
}
@@ -427,7 +425,7 @@ _initiate_cifs_search(const unsigned int xid, struct file *file,
} else if (cifs_sb->mnt_cifs_flags & CIFS_MOUNT_SERVER_INUM) {
cifsFile->srch_inf.info_level = SMB_FIND_FILE_ID_FULL_DIR_INFO;
} else /* not srvinos - BB fixme add check for backlevel? */ {
- cifsFile->srch_inf.info_level = SMB_FIND_FILE_FULL_DIRECTORY_INFO;
+ cifsFile->srch_inf.info_level = SMB_FIND_FILE_DIRECTORY_INFO;
}
search_flags = CIFS_SEARCH_CLOSE_AT_END | CIFS_SEARCH_RETURN_RESUME;
@@ -1021,9 +1019,10 @@ static int cifs_filldir(char *find_entry, struct file *file,
(FIND_FILE_STANDARD_INFO *)find_entry,
cifs_sb);
break;
- case SMB_FIND_FILE_FULL_DIRECTORY_INFO:
case SMB_FIND_FILE_ID_FULL_DIR_INFO:
- cifs_fulldir_info_to_fattr(, find_entry, cifs_sb);
+ cifs_fulldir_info_to_fattr(,
+ (SEARCH_ID_FULL_DIR_INFO *)find_entry,
+ cifs_sb);
break;
default:
cifs_dir_info_to_fattr(,
diff --git a/fs/smb/client/smb2pdu.c b/fs/smb/client/smb2pdu.c
index cc425a616899..f95623b24405 100644
--- a/fs/smb/client/smb2pdu.c
+++ b/fs/smb/client/smb2pdu.c
@@ -5010,9 +5010,6 @@ int SMB2_query_directory_init(const unsigned int xid,
case SMB_FIND_FILE_POSIX_INFO:
req->FileInformationClass = SMB_FIND_FILE_POSIX_INFO;
break;
- case SMB_FIND_FILE_FULL_DIRECTORY_INFO:
- req->FileInformationClass = FILE_FULL_DIRECTORY_INFORMATION;
- break;
default:
cifs_tcon_dbg(VFS, "info level %u isn't supported\n",
info_level);
@@ -5082,9 +5079,6 @@ smb2_parse_query_directory(struct cifs_tcon *tcon,
/* note
Processed: Re: Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares
Processing control commands: > tags -1 + moreinfo Bug #1069102 [src:linux] linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares Bug #1069092 [src:linux] Kernel 6.1.85-1 breaking CIFS mounts? Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #1069102 to the same tags previously set Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #1069092 to the same tags previously set -- 1069092: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1069092 1069102: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1069102 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares
Processing control commands: > tags -1 + moreinfo Bug #1069092 [src:linux] Kernel 6.1.85-1 breaking CIFS mounts? Bug #1069102 [src:linux] linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #1069092 to the same tags previously set Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #1069102 to the same tags previously set -- 1069092: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1069092 1069102: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1069102 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares
Processing control commands: > tags -1 + moreinfo Bug #1069102 [src:linux] linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares Bug #1069092 [src:linux] Kernel 6.1.85-1 breaking CIFS mounts? Added tag(s) moreinfo. Added tag(s) moreinfo. -- 1069092: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1069092 1069102: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1069102 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares
Control: tags -1 + moreinfo Hi On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 02:17:49PM +0200, Manfred Larcher wrote: > Package: src:linux > Version: 6.1.85-1 > Severity: important > > Dear Maintainer, > >* What led up to the situation? > kernel update from version 6.1.0-18 to 6.1.0-20 > >* What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or > ineffective)? > out system mounted a samba share via autofs (cifs) and we tried to access > some files and directories > >* What was the outcome of this action? > the mount point of our share is /srv/samba/shares/company and the directory > it/MIJ had another directory "digitale kommunikation" which did not shop up > on the computer which mounted the samba share. before the kernel update it > did and when we renamed the file to "digitale_kommunikation" or to "digitalo > kommunikation" we could see it. > in the syslog we found the following messages: > CIFS: VFS: directory entry name would overflow frame end of buf ... > we could move that direcotry into another directory and it was useable, we > created another directory it/abc and created the "digitale kommunikation" > inside and it was hidden again. after switching back to kernel 6.1.0-20 > everything was ok. > upgrade to kernel 6.5.0-0.deb12.4-amd64 package was ok too. > >* What outcome did you expect instead? > we expected to just see the "digitale kommunikation" directory as before. Can you share details on how the cifs mounts are done? Which mount options are used? Were you able to find a minimal reproducing case which would help debug the issue on non production systems? Regards, Salvatore
Bug#1069102: linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 and cifs mount problem on some folders which get hidden on shares
Package: src:linux Version: 6.1.85-1 Severity: important Dear Maintainer, * What led up to the situation? kernel update from version 6.1.0-18 to 6.1.0-20 * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or ineffective)? out system mounted a samba share via autofs (cifs) and we tried to access some files and directories * What was the outcome of this action? the mount point of our share is /srv/samba/shares/company and the directory it/MIJ had another directory "digitale kommunikation" which did not shop up on the computer which mounted the samba share. before the kernel update it did and when we renamed the file to "digitale_kommunikation" or to "digitalo kommunikation" we could see it. in the syslog we found the following messages: CIFS: VFS: directory entry name would overflow frame end of buf ... we could move that direcotry into another directory and it was useable, we created another directory it/abc and created the "digitale kommunikation" inside and it was hidden again. after switching back to kernel 6.1.0-20 everything was ok. upgrade to kernel 6.5.0-0.deb12.4-amd64 package was ok too. * What outcome did you expect instead? we expected to just see the "digitale kommunikation" directory as before. -- Package-specific info: ** Kernel log: boot messages should be attached -- System Information: Debian Release: 12.1 APT prefers stable-updates APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'stable-security'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 6.5.0-0.deb12.4-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU threads; PREEMPT) Kernel taint flags: TAINT_OOT_MODULE, TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE not set Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) LSM: AppArmor: enabled Versions of packages linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 depends on: ii initramfs-tools [linux-initramfs-tool] 0.142 ii kmod30+20221128-1 ii linux-base 4.9 Versions of packages linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 recommends: ii apparmor 3.0.8-3 ii firmware-linux-free 20200122-1 Versions of packages linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 suggests: pn debian-kernel-handbook ii grub-efi-amd64 2.06-13+deb12u1 pn linux-doc-6.1 Versions of packages linux-image-6.1.0-20-amd64 is related to: pn firmware-amd-graphics pn firmware-atheros pn firmware-bnx2 pn firmware-bnx2x pn firmware-brcm80211 pn firmware-cavium pn firmware-intel-sound pn firmware-intelwimax pn firmware-ipw2x00 pn firmware-ivtv pn firmware-iwlwifi pn firmware-libertas pn firmware-linux-nonfree pn firmware-misc-nonfree pn firmware-myricom pn firmware-netxen pn firmware-qlogic pn firmware-realtek pn firmware-samsung pn firmware-siano pn firmware-ti-connectivity pn xen-hypervisor -- no debconf information
