Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.

Bug 1176172

Summary: CIFS cannot write more than 2147483647 bytes on SMB2 (vers=2.0/2.1)
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 Reporter: Ryan Crews <rcrews>
Component: kernelAssignee: Sachin Prabhu <sprabhu>
kernel sub component: CIFS QA Contact: xiaoli feng <xifeng>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE Docs Contact:
Severity: low    
Priority: medium CC: bdwheele, eguan, sprabhu, xifeng
Version: 7.0   
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2015-05-20 15:11:17 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Ryan Crews 2014-12-19 15:42:01 UTC
Description of problem: Attempting to write a file larger than 2GB~ (2147483647 bytes) fails with 'File too large'/


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
3.10.0-123.el7.x86_64, cifs-utils-6.2-6.el7.x86_64
also tested against: 3.10.0-123.13.1.el7.x86_64

How reproducible: 100%


Steps to Reproduce:
1. mount CIFS share with vers=2.0 or vers=2.1
2. dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/share/bigfile.bin bs=1M count=3000

Actual results:
[root@misuzu orz]# dd if=/dev/zero of=bigfile.bin bs=1M count=3000
dd: error writing ‘bigfile.bin’: File too large
2048+0 records in
2047+0 records out
2147483647 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 143.139 s, 15.0 MB/s
[root@misuzu orz]# 


Expected results: Successful completion of write.

Additional info:
Each attempt only writes 2147483647 bytes (2.1 GB)
I've reproduced against Win 2008 R2; and customer has reproduced against Isilon NAS running OneFS 7.1.0.4

Comment 1 Brian Wheeler 2015-04-07 13:15:59 UTC
Is there any update to this?  I'm creating a system that's got to process around 14T of data a day and having SMB2 would help a lot.

This also fails when attaching to a windows 7 machine.

Comment 2 Sachin Prabhu 2015-04-13 08:55:47 UTC
Brian, 

Kernel version 3.10.0-150.el7 contains the upstream commit 
2f6c9479633780ba4a3484bba7eba5a721a5cf20 - cifs: Fix inability to write files >2GB to SMB2/3 shares

You will need to upgrade to the latest released version which contains the patch.
https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2015-0290.html

WRT SMB 2.0+, This part of the code is currently under active development upstream and lacks several essential features. This also affects RHEL 7 which depends on upstream. There is also a higher chance of hitting bugs in this code. I would therefore not recommend it for production use.

Sachin Prabhu