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 651865 - cifs: bug fixes for 6.1
Summary: cifs: bug fixes for 6.1
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
Classification: Red Hat
Component: kernel
Version: 6.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
low
medium
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Jeff Layton
QA Contact: yanfu,wang
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2010-11-10 14:13 UTC by Jeff Layton
Modified: 2011-05-19 12:39 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version: kernel-2.6.32-112.el6
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-05-19 12:39:07 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHSA-2011:0542 0 normal SHIPPED_LIVE Important: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.1 kernel security, bug fix and enhancement update 2011-05-19 11:58:07 UTC

Description Jeff Layton 2010-11-10 14:13:46 UTC 
A number of bug fixes have been merged upstream since RHEL6.0 was branched and patched. This bug is to track merging them.
Comment 1 RHEL Program Management 2010-11-18 18:19:32 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 3 Aristeu Rozanski 2011-02-03 15:28:31 UTC 
Patch(es) available on kernel-2.6.32-112.el6
Comment 6 yanfu,wang 2011-05-06 06:13:52 UTC 
hi Jeff,
I found there's different from the patch http://patchwork.usersys.redhat.com/patch/29746/ when build kernel-2.6.32-112.el6 src package.
For example, the patch shown as below:
diff --git a/fs/cifs/cifsproto.h b/fs/cifs/cifsproto.h
...
 extern struct cifsFileInfo *cifs_new_fileinfo(struct inode *newinode,
 				__u16 fileHandle, struct file *file,
-				struct vfsmount *mnt, unsigned int oflags);
+				struct vfsmount *mnt, unsigned int oflags,
+				__u32 oplock);


and the patch applied result shown as below after using rpmbuild -bp:
extern struct cifsFileInfo *cifs_new_fileinfo(__u16 fileHandle,
                                struct file *file, struct tcon_link *tlink,
                                __u32 oplock);


Is there anything I'm missing?
Comment 7 Jeff Layton 2011-05-06 11:14:05 UTC 
Yes, you're missing looking at the later patches in the set. There are several patches that touch the same places in the code.
Comment 8 yanfu,wang 2011-05-09 05:34:41 UTC 
(In reply to comment #7)
> Yes, you're missing looking at the later patches in the set. There are several
> patches that touch the same places in the code.

thanks, I found the vfsmount pointer is removed from cifsFileInfo against comment #6 in http://patchwork.usersys.redhat.com/patch/30051/ which fixed in bug 656461.

set it SanityOnly and have run some nfs regression testing, pls refer to the errata's comments.
Comment 9 errata-xmlrpc 2011-05-19 12:39:07 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-2011-0542.html
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.