Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
For bugs related to Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 product line. The current stable release is 5.10. For Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 and above, please visit Red Hat JIRA https://issues.redhat.com/secure/CreateIssue!default.jspa?pid=12332745 to report new issues.

Bug 529431

Summary: Update to 2.6.18-164.el5PAE causes working CIFS mount to fail
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Reporter: Justin Payne <jpayne>
Component: kernelAssignee: Jeff Layton <jlayton>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Red Hat Kernel QE team <kernel-qe>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: 5.4CC: jtluka, steved
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: 5.5   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-03-30 07:43:31 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Attachments:
Description Flags
tcpdump of failed mount attempt
none
dmesg with cifs debugging on
none
patch -- don't use CIFSGetSrvInodeNumber
none
patch -- don't use CIFSGetSrvInodeNumber none

Description Justin Payne 2009-10-16 19:37:56 UTC
Created attachment 365085 [details]
tcpdump of failed mount attempt

Description of problem:

When we upgraded the system to RHEL 5.4 (11th of September) and we booted with 2.6.18-164.el5PAE kernel, without changing the fstab lines that worked with the previous kernel (2.6.18-128.7.1.el5PAE), we received the following errors (at boot and also when we tried to mount cifs shares manually after boot):

Sep 11 01:30:31 keromA kernel:  CIFS VFS: Path \BUCHAREST\OCSS\TO_KEROM in not accessible: -5
Sep 11 01:30:31 keromA kernel:  CIFS VFS: cifs_mount failed w/return code = -5
Sep 11 01:30:32 keromA kernel:  CIFS VFS: Path \BUCHAREST\OCSS\FROM_KEROM in not accessible: -5
Sep 11 01:30:32 keromA kernel:  CIFS VFS: cifs_mount failed w/return code = -5

The only mount that worked with 2.6.18-164.el5PAE kernel was when we mounted //10.3.62.103/SITES path, not the whole normal path. Any other tentative to mount partial paths (like //10.3.62.103/SITES/BUCHAREST or //10.3.62.103/SITES/BUCHAREST/OCSS) failed with the same error as above.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:

always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.boot server to 2.6.18-164.el5PAE kernel with existing fstab options
2.
3.
  
Actual results:
Mounts fail with the following output:

Sep 11 01:30:31 keromA kernel:  CIFS VFS: Path \BUCHAREST\OCSS\TO_KEROM in not accessible: -5
Sep 11 01:30:31 keromA kernel:  CIFS VFS: cifs_mount failed w/return code = -5
Sep 11 01:30:32 keromA kernel:  CIFS VFS: Path \BUCHAREST\OCSS\FROM_KEROM in not accessible: -5
Sep 11 01:30:32 keromA kernel:  CIFS VFS: cifs_mount failed w/return code = -5


Expected results:

Mounts work the same as with 2.6.18-128.7.1.el5PAE.


Additional info:

Mounts from the command line fail also. Mounting //10.3.62.103/SITES path, not the whole works with the new kernel.

Comment 1 Justin Payne 2009-10-16 19:42:40 UTC
Created attachment 365086 [details]
dmesg with cifs debugging on

Also attaching the dmesg output after attempting to mount with the following echoed into cifsFYI:

[root@keromB ~]# modprobe -r cifs
[root@keromB ~]# modprobe cifs
[root@keromB ~]# echo 7 > /proc/fs/cifs/cifsFYI
[root@keromB ~]# mount.cifs //10.3.62.103/SITES/BUCHAREST/OCSS/TO_KEROM /mnt/RemoteSource --verbose -o auto,owner,rw,uid=502,gid=502,username=bcqdls,password=bcqdls
parsing options: auto,owner,rw,uid=502,gid=502,username=bcqdls,password=bcqdls
mount.cifs kernel mount options unc=//10.3.62.103\SITES,ip=10.3.62.103,ver=1,auto,owner,rw,username=bcqdls,password=bcqdls,uid=502,gid=502,prefixpath=BUCHAREST/OCSS/TO_KEROM
mount error 5 = Input/output error
Refer to the mount.cifs(8) manual page (e.g.man mount.cifs)
[root@keromB ~]# dmesg > dmesg.txt

Comment 2 Jeff Layton 2009-10-17 01:35:11 UTC
Created attachment 365104 [details]
patch -- don't use CIFSGetSrvInodeNumber

Ok, I think I see the problem. This patch should fix it. I'll add this to my next set of test kernels, but it or something like it will need to be pushed upstream too.

Thank them for the bug report and the capture. I'll let you know when I have a kernel for them to test.

Comment 3 Jeff Layton 2009-10-17 01:53:00 UTC
Created attachment 365105 [details]
patch -- don't use CIFSGetSrvInodeNumber

Oops...wrong patch (though loosely related, actually). This is the real one...

Comment 4 Jeff Layton 2009-10-18 00:19:37 UTC
Ok, I've built some RHEL5 test kernels with this patch and put them on my PRC page:

    http://people.redhat.com/jlayton/

If the reporter is able, could they test these and let us know whether they fix the problem?

Comment 5 RHEL Program Management 2009-11-10 19:00:58 UTC
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red
Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release.  Product Management has requested
further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential
inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update release for currently deployed
products.  This request is not yet committed for inclusion in an Update
release.

Comment 7 Don Zickus 2009-12-04 19:00:11 UTC
in kernel-2.6.18-177.el5
You can download this test kernel from http://people.redhat.com/dzickus/el5

Please do NOT transition this bugzilla state to VERIFIED until our QE team
has sent specific instructions indicating when to do so.  However feel free
to provide a comment indicating that this fix has been verified.

Comment 10 errata-xmlrpc 2010-03-30 07:43:31 UTC
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2010-0178.html