[Samba] strict locking and kernel oplocks in the smb.conf

Philip Ong phong at nvidia.com
Fri Sep 30 17:39:18 MDT 2011

No other process is accessing it. So any idea why it would work fine without "strict locking = no" in previous kernels below

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeremy Allison [jra at samba.org<mailto:jra at samba.org>]
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2011 03:09 PM Pacific Standard Time
To: Philip Ong
Cc: 'Jeremy Allison'; 'samba at lists.samba.org'
Subject: Re: [Samba] strict locking and kernel oplocks in the smb.conf

On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:48:52AM -0700, Philip Ong wrote:
> Hope this helps.
> [Philip Ong] Thanks, yes, it does. I'm having a problem with being able to copy a local
> Windows file to NFS area shared by samba on WinXP. If I set "strict locking = no", I'm
> able to copy the file to the NFS area shared via samba. This seems to only happen when
> upgrading from a kernel.org kernel of and higher. I've tried on Centos 4.5 and
> 5.6 and all seems to point to either kernel or samba mix (3.5.11 and 3.6). I'd like to
> know the damage setting "strict locking = no" could possibly cause especially since I'm
> not sure if I'd want to ignore mandatory locks. Is this going to be a big problem? What
> are considered mandatory locks?

Actually you probably do want to ignore mandatory locks :-).

Is there another process accessing this file at the same
time ? If there is, and that process has taken a POSIX/NFS
lock out on the file, then "strict locking = yes" will

More likely it's just an NFS bug in the locking code
though :-).


This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
confidential information.  Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution
is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by
reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.

More information about the samba mailing list