code but if someone
would want to tackle this I think there is opportunity to make
a huge impact on directory listing performance.
regards
ronnie sahlberg
- Original Message -
> From: "Steve French"
> To: "CIFS" , "samba-technical"
> , "LKM
Reviewed-by: Ronnie Sahlberg
- Original Message -
From: "Colin King"
To: "Steve French" , linux-c...@vger.kernel.org,
samba-techni...@lists.samba.org
Cc: kernel-janit...@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Wednesday, 17 January, 2018 8:52:39 PM
S
The problem is in fs/cifs/file.c:cifs_find_fid_lock_conflict since it is not
aware of OFD locks
and thus think there is a conflict.
I have an initial patch that fixes the problem for the reproducer but need more
time to understand if/what
else might need fixin.
- Original Message -
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 8:58 AM, Theodore Y. Ts'o via samba-technical
wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 05:37:15PM -0500, Steve French wrote:
>> Ronnie brought up an interesting point about the problems consistently
>> configuring file systems (or any Linux module for that matter) so that
>> reboot
Steve,
Looks good. It builds and seems to work in my testing.
Thanks.
- Original Message -
From: "Steve French"
To: "Stephen Rothwell"
Cc: "CIFS" , "Linux-Next Mailing List"
, "Linux Kernel Mailing List"
, "Kees Cook" , &q
Very nice.
Acked-by: Ronnie Sahlberg
Possibly change the output from
pid=6633 tid=0x0 sid=0x0 cmd=0 mid=0
to
cmd=0 mid=0 pid=6633 tid=0x0 sid=0x0
just to make it easier for human-searching. I think the cmd will be useful much
more often than pid/tid/sid
and this would make it easier to look
nie Sahlberg wrote:
>> Very nice.
>>
>> Acked-by: Ronnie Sahlberg
>>
>> Possibly change the output from
>> pid=6633 tid=0x0 sid=0x0 cmd=0 mid=0
>> to
>> cmd=0 mid=0 pid=6633 tid=0x0 sid=0x0
>>
>> just to make it easier for human-searching.
Good catch, but I think it should be :
int resp_buftype = CIFS_NO_BUFFER;
- Original Message -
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva"
To: "Steve French" , "Ronnie Sahlberg"
Cc: linux-c...@vger.kernel.org, samba-techni...@lists.samba.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.or
reviewed by me
On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 7:53 AM Steve French wrote:
>
> cifs: remove unused value pointed out by Coverity
>
> Detected by CoverityScan CID#1438719 ("Unused Value")
>
> buf is reset again before being used so these two lines of code
> are useless.
>
> Signed-off-by: Steve French
>
module name, that is user visible and
there it is important we call it smb3 something
but the source tree is not end-user visible so it was less important
what the name was.
(the alternative ending up with fs/cifs fs/ksmbd and fs/cifs_common
would have been terrible)
regards
ronnie sahlberg
>
> I also agree that wrappers around core memory allocators are to
> be avoided.
>
> Tom.
On Sun, Mar 7, 2021 at 8:52 PM Shyam Prasad N via samba-technical
wrote:
>
> Hi Vincent,
>
> The reason for rejecting the request maybe a number of things like:
> corrupted request, stale request (for some old session), or for a
> wrong handle.
> I don't think we should treat any of these cases as
Impressive!
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Steve French wrote:
> Performance of Pavel's multicredit i/o SMB3 patches continues to look
> good. Additional informal performance results below comparing cifs
> mounts with smb3 mounts (vers=3.0) with and without Pavel's patch set.
> I plan to do a
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 2:00 PM Steve French wrote:
>
> Merged into cifs-2.6.git for-next
>
> Ronnie,
> You ok with merging this as a distinct patch?
Sure thing.
Thanks for the fix Colin.
>
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 7:02 PM Colin King wrote:
> >
> > From: Colin Ian King
> >
> > A previous fix
On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 1:15 AM Sasha Levin wrote:
>
> From: "Eric W. Biederman"
>
> [ Upstream commit 72abe3bcf0911d69b46c1e8bdb5612675e0ac42c ]
>
> The locking in force_sig_info is not prepared to deal with a task that
> exits or execs (as sighand may change). The is not a locking problem
> in
Looks good to me (both patches)
Reviewed-by: Ronnie Sahlberg
On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 8:16 AM, Long Li wrote:
> From: Long Li
>
> During transport reconnect, other processes may have registered memory
> and blocked on transport. This creates a deadlock situation because the
t; smb_rqst *rqst,
> void
> SMB2_ioctl_free(struct smb_rqst *rqst)
> {
> - if (rqst && rqst->rq_iov)
> + if (rqst && rqst->rq_iov) {
> cifs_small_buf_release(rqst->rq_iov[0].iov_base); /* request
> */
> + if (rqst->rq_iov[1].iov_len)
> + kfree(rqst->rq_iov[1].iov_base);
You don't need the conditional. kfree(NULL) is safe,.
> + }
> }
>
>
> --
> 2.17.1
>
Reviewed-by: Ronnie sahlberg
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 6:54 PM, Long Li wrote:
> From: Long Li
>
> Add code to implement the core functions to establish a SMB Direct connection.
>
> 1. Establish an RDMA connection to SMB server.
> 2. Negotiate and setup SMB Direct protocol.
> 3. Implement idle connection timer and credit manage
17 matches
Mail list logo