rsync is not an option in this case, neither is upgrading the kernel.. Long story behind that :)� The kernel is 2.6.9, so all though it is not the newest, it isn't to bad off..<br><br>I'm using tar to get the data to the CIFS mount, so I think I just need to copy the data back and see if the data checks out okay and then go from there.� <br>
<br>This same system is running on several machines with out any problems, and most the machines are running similar kernels..� so its hard to point at the kernel in this case.. Now I did read somewhere that if the host of the cifs mount is busy when the file copy is going on that it might be the cause of the error, so I may just need to see whats going on there� and attack it from that side..<br>
<br>Thanks for the reply, it helped shed some light on this issue.<br><br>-Steve<br>�<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 10:13 PM, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:cecrops@herring.sandwich.net">cecrops@herring.sandwich.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div><div></div><div class="h5">On Tue, 22 Feb 2011, Steve Johnson wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Hey guys, I keep seeing this error in my logs, I understand what might be<br>
causing it, but what I am wondering, since it is a warning, and not an<br>
error, and there is only 1.. Does this mean the system re-tried and got past<br>
it? �This happens during a large file copy that happens nightly.. Do I need<br>
to worry about data integrity?<br>
<br>
--------------------- Kernel Begin ------------------------<br>
<br>
WARNING: �Kernel Errors Present<br>
� CIFS VFS: Error -4 sending data ...: �1 Time(s)<br>
<br>
---------------------- Kernel End -------------------------<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br></div></div>
I looked around the CIFS code and see no sign that it retries in this case, so I would worry. Is it possible to rsync the data?<br>
<br>
<br>
This posting says that problem can be caused by old versions of CIFS<br>
running in non-blocking mode, and suggests a kernel update as a resolution:<br>
<a href="http://lists.samba.org/archive/linux-cifs-client/2009-April/004482.html" target="_blank">http://lists.samba.org/archive/linux-cifs-client/2009-April/004482.html</a><br>
<br>
<br>
Notes that you may or may not find useful:<br>
<br>
The error message comes from smb_send() in transport.c of cifs. Other parts of transport.c check the returns from kernel_sendmsg for the negatives of errno.h errors, so the -4 could be EINTR 4, interrupted system call.<br>
<br>
What happens when RC receives a negative number in SendReceive() in<br>
transport.c:<br>
<br>
rc = smb_send(ses->server->ssocket, in_buf, in_buf->smb_buf_length,<br>
� � (struct sockaddr *) &(ses->server->addr.sockAddr));<br>
<br>
if(rc < 0) {<br>
� � � �DeleteMidQEntry(midQ);<br>
� � � �up(&ses->server->tcpSem);<br>
<br>
� � � �/* If not lock req, update # of requests on wire to server */<br>
� � � �if(long_op < 3) {<br>
� � � � � � � �atomic_dec(&ses->server->inFlight);<br>
� � � � � � � �wake_up(&ses->server->request_q);<br>
� � � �}<br>
� � � �return rc;<br>
}<br>
<br>
It looks like it just cuts out, but I can't tell what the other gears will be doing. It might be up to the userspace program to detect failure and retry.<br>
<br>
In the kernel, it looks like something is going wrong around<br>
wait_on_sync_kiocb() but I could be mistaken.<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
talk mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:talk@nblug.org" target="_blank">talk@nblug.org</a><br>
<a href="http://nblug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk" target="_blank">http://nblug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br>