fcntl F_SETLKW64 failing on Solaris

[Andrew Bartlett]

Jeremy Allison wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 11:11:59AM +1100, Anton Blanchard wrote:
> 
> > But samba never SEGVs Jeremy :)
> 
> Hahahahaahahahahaha ! :-) :-) :-).
> 
> > Yes there is no way out if something
> > dies with a spinlock. But if a process dies inside a critical region its
> > probably better to start from scratch, who knows what ugly things have
> > happened to the tdb by that stage.
> 
> Well, you're right of course. But smbd now does try and do
> validation of share entries from the tdb before returning
> them, so there is some measur of recovers there. But that's
> mainly for errent smbd's (logic bugs :-) rather than a
> corrupt tdb, from which there is no return..... :-) :-).
> 
> Jeremy.

Well I would certainly like an 'errent smbd' check.  I've been bitten by
a bug in Samba (compleatly unable to reproduce) where on smbd was
waiting on another for the lock on locking.tdb.  The lock never came
loose (at least thats my theory) and the whole of samba was screwed
until a restart. 

If we could at least get a 

DEBUG(0,("waiting on lock on %s from %d for %d seconds - somthing is
wrong!\n", file, pid_lock_owner, secs_waited))

I would really appricate it.  Even better would be to actually kill off
errent smbds holding locks for too long, but that might be a bit
extreme...  At least the DEBUG() might tell me whats going on...

Andrew Bartlett
-- 
Andrew Bartlett                                 abartlet at pcug.org.au
Manager, Authentication Subsystems, Samba Team  abartlet at samba.org
Student Network Administrator, Hawker College   abartlet at hawkerc.net
http://samba.org     http://build.samba.org     http://hawkerc.net