Question on how smbd handles signals (possible bug)

[tvrtko.ursulin at sophos.com]

samba-technical-bounces+tvrtko.ursulin=sophos.com at lists.samba.org wrote on 
25/09/2008 10:39:08:

> Volker Lendecke <Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE> wrote on 24/09/2008 
18:13:55:
> 
> > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 10:40:54AM +0100, tvrtko.ursulin at sophos.com 
> wrote:
> > 
> > > This suggest that Samba is expecting signals from lock breakers in 
> order 
> > > to release files but that is not in line with what you just said. So 
I 
> am 
> > > confused. Why it should be necessary to turn off oplocks, even the 
man 
> 
> > > page says that should never be needed?
> > 
> > The problem is that so far nobody but Samba makes use of the
> > lease calls, so we might have bugs here. Your host
> > apparently has an application that takes oplocks, and this
> > is a new situation. Timely responding to external oplock
> > break signals under all circumstances is a major rewrite
> > that will not be done soon.
> 
> I will try and collect information on what else is running on the 
machine 
> and get back to you with that. In the meantime, could you help me 
> understand what you think is happening and how it is related to "kernel 
> oplocks = yes"? (and I will also find out if setting this option to "no" 

> helps)

Small update. Issue was confirmed on these Samba versions (note how they 
are from various distributions):
samba-3.0.13-1.2-SUSE
samba-3.0.10-1.4E.11
samba-3.0.14a-26AX
samba-3.0.20b-2AX

"kernel oplocks = no" workaround didn't help on:
3.0.13-1.2-SUSE

Issue can't be replicated on:
3.0.28a-1ubuntu4.5
3.2.4 (self compiled)


Best regards,

Tvrtko



Sophos Plc, The Pentagon, Abingdon Science Park, Abingdon,
OX14 3YP, United Kingdom.

Company Reg No 2096520. VAT Reg No GB 348 3873 20.