Description of problem: I see tons of automount[2717]: expire_indirect: fstat failed: Bad file descriptor messages in /var/log/messages. Every 1 or 2 minutes. I'm not adding that many new mounts so I can only assume that autofs does not remove the descriptor after fstat failed. If fstat return EBADF there is no reason whatsoever to keep it around. If the descriptor becomes usable again at some point it is for something else and then the fstat can only give incorrect information. I doubt that autofs should get into this situation in the first place (no idea what happened) but at least handle the situation more graceful if the problem is detected. Otherwise you fill up /var/log/messages and cause greater harm by hijacking a descriptor. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): autofs-5.0.1-0.rc3.6.x86_64 How reproducible: don't know Steps to Reproduce: 1.don't really know. create situation where descriptor is gone 2. 3. Actual results: tons of such messages Expected results: exactly one such message Additional info:
Hmm, the file descriptor is the ioctl fd. Either ioctlfd is getting corrupted, or we're trying to expire an already expired mount? Can you attach a copy of your maps please?
I'm using the default maps, nothing changed at all. And the only map I use /etc/auto.net via /net/HOSTNAME/some/dir. That's it.
(In reply to comment #2) > I'm using the default maps, nothing changed at all. And the only map I use > /etc/auto.net via /net/HOSTNAME/some/dir. That's it. Can you grab autofs-5.0.1-0.rc3.10 and give it a try please. Ian
I've downloaded it an will use it. I cannot remember having seen the problem before so it might be not so easy to confirm the problem is gone. If you think it is fixed I think it's best to close the bug and I'll reopen it in case I see it again.
(In reply to comment #4) > I've downloaded it an will use it. I cannot remember having seen the problem > before so it might be not so easy to confirm the problem is gone. If you think > it is fixed I think it's best to close the bug and I'll reopen it in case I see > it again. I had two other reports that I believe where the same problem. Both reporters have have posted that it appears to be fixed. I'm fairly sure it was introduced by a patch I added on the 27th Dec to fix another issue. It won't hurt to leave this open for a while longer to give you a chance to check it out. Ian
(In reply to comment #4) > I've downloaded it an will use it. I cannot remember having seen the problem > before so it might be not so easy to confirm the problem is gone. If you think > it is fixed I think it's best to close the bug and I'll reopen it in case I see > it again. No time to check this out? I'll close this as you recommend. Ian