Hi Obaid, yes, with
--option=torture:subtest=1 --option=torture:single=yes Please note that this is a similar problem to the one described in [MS-SMB2] disconnected PH looses RH lease - TrackingID#2508130040006291It seems this behavior is related to having a byterange lock on the file. When no taking a brl in an otherwise unchanged scenario, the R lease is maintained and not dropped.
The interesting question is: *why* this difference? Thanks! -slow On 9/11/25 11:44 PM, Obaid Farooqi wrote:
Hi Ralph: What is the test case for this scenario in smbtorture? I imagined it is in smb2.persistent-open.reconnect-contended. Regards, Obaid Farooqi Sr. Escalation Engineer | Microsoft -----Original Message----- From: Kristian Smith <kristian.sm...@microsoft.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2025 10:20 AM To: Ralph Boehme <s...@samba.org> Cc: cifs-protocol@lists.samba.org; Microsoft Support <supportm...@microsoft.com> Subject: [MS-SMB2] Disconnected PH looses R lease without epoch bump - TrackingID#2508130040006013 [DocHelp to Bcc] Hi Slow, Thanks for reaching out with your Persistent Handle question. I've created case 2508130040006013 to track the issue. One of our engineers will investigate this and reach out to you soon. Regards, Kristian Smith Support Escalation Engineer | Microsoft® Corporation Email: kristian.sm...@microsoft.com -----Original Message----- From: Ralph Boehme <s...@samba.org> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2025 3:13 AM To: Interoperability Documentation Help <doch...@microsoft.com> Cc: cifs-protocol@lists.samba.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] MS-SMB2: Disconnected PH looses R lease without epoch bump Hi dochelp! Here comes another one related to Persistent Handles... I see the following behaviour against a Windows server with Fileserver for General Use role: 1. Client 1 opens file with PH, lease=R and sharemode=none 2. Client 1 disconnects TCP connection 3. Client 2 tries to open file and gets STATUS_FILE_NOT_AVAILABLE 4. Client 1 reconnects SMB 5. Client 1 reconnects PH, this succeeds but the lease is downgrade to NONE but the lease epoch is still the same as in step 1, iow it is not bumped Is this expected behaviour? There's footnote 247 in "3.3.4.7 Object Store Indicates a Lease Break" but none of the cases described there seem to cover my scenario. According to the SDC presentation "SMB 2.2 : Bigger, Faster, Scalier (Part 2)" from 2011, page 50, the server must bump the lease epoch. Can you please clarify? Traces (pcap + t.cmd) available. Thanks! -slow
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ cifs-protocol mailing list cifs-protocol@lists.samba.org https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/cifs-protocol
