From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 10 22:57:46 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55E801065681 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 22:57:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from an-out-0708.google.com (an-out-0708.google.com [209.85.132.247]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E6B18FC36 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 22:57:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b33so698502ana.13 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:57:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.227.20 with SMTP id z20mr6435870ang.62.1213138665057; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:57:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.154.11 with HTTP; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:57:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:57:45 -0700 From: "Peter Wemm" To: "Garrett Cooper" In-Reply-To: <7d6fde3d0806091853w2d5a5587i622790f65eba4734@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <7d6fde3d0806091102k62637099qbaa73ca4d38ff64c@mail.gmail.com> <7d6fde3d0806091853w2d5a5587i622790f65eba4734@mail.gmail.com> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Moving from smbfs to cifs X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 22:57:46 -0000 On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 6:53 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 1:19 PM, Peter Wemm wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Garrett Cooper wrote: >>> Hello all, >>> I was wondering if there's been any serious thought put into >>> migrating from smbfs (unmaintained project in kernel / userland since >>> 2001) to cifs (currently supported Samba project). This is the >>> mount_smbfs user tool that's available in userland. >>> There are some related questions about this and observations >>> that I've made: >>> Pros: >>> 1. cifs is the successor to smbfs, which is good from a >>> performance and feature enhancement end. >>> 2. It's supported, which means that any bugs in the code can >>> be filed upstream and we'll be helped. This is an important point as I >>> appear to be hard locking up my system with some kind of non-MPSAFE >>> issue at kernel level on a very fresh copy of -CURRENT. >>> >>> Cons: >>> 1. cifs is currently Linux centric (it currently uses quite a >>> few Linux calls and references the Linux module code base); that will >>> need to be fixed. >>> 2. It's GPL v2 licensed, which means that more GPL code will >>> "infect" the kernel, whereas smbfs was in a more BSD-like license >>> format. >>> >>> So, my question would be "do the pros outweigh the cons for >>> attempting to migrate from smbfs to cifs in the kernel?" >>> Thanks, >>> -Garrett >> >> I was surprised to discover that smbfs works as well as it does. I >> really was expecting a whole pile of panics, lockups etc, but for my >> usage level, it seems to just work. On my smp desktop: >> >> peter@overcee[1:16pm]~/fbp4/hammer/sys/dev/twa-193> mount | grep smbfs | wc -l >> 5 >> peter@overcee[1:17pm]~/fbp4/hammer/sys/dev/twa-194> uptime >> 1:17PM up 49 days, 21:46, 6 users, load averages: 0.29, 0.26, 0.17 >> >> Maybe it'll all catch fire tomorrow.. > > Well, I wish I had your luck Peter. Every time I try and mount my > admin share on my Vista box (for testing purposes only now), the > mount_smbfs proc locks up the kernel with a strange recursive lock > error (I think that's what causes it at least; I can't attach kgdb or > core dump the machine... My goals are considerably lower. I'm just mounting a Buffalo Terastation, which is a tiny linux file server running samba. Maybe that helps keep things simple enough to work. In any case, it was easier for me to do that than to hack the nfs support into the server. -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 "If Java had true garbage collection, most programs would delete themselves upon execution." -- Robert Sewell