Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 20:52:24 -0500 From: Randy Terbush <randy@zyzzyva.com> To: Thomas David Rivers <ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: (*my* problems found...yours?) NFS problems - it doesn't appear to be ep0. Message-ID: <199704150152.UAA11924@sierra.zyzzyva.com> In-Reply-To: ponds!rivers's message of Sat, 12 Apr 1997 09:11:24 -0400. <199704121311.JAA19644@lakes.water.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Since 2.2-GAMMA a new flag has been added to the sysctl. By setting vfs.nfs.nfs_privport=0, NFS works fine. For some reason, the NFS server is booting with vfs.nfs.nfs_privport=1. Can anyone explain the use of this parameter? #> sysctl vfs vfs.nfs.nfs_privport: 0 vfs.nfs.async: 0 vfs.nfs.defect: 0 vfs.nfs.diskless_valid: 0 vfs.nfs.diskless_rootpath: vfs.nfs.diskless_swappath: > Dan Nelson writes: > > In the last episode (Apr 11), Thomas David Rivers said: > > > > > > Well, regarding my NFS hang-ups to HP/UX 9.05 and Sunos 4.1.3 > > > systems (this is 2.2.1 as of April 8th). > > > > > > I replaced my 3c509 with a 3c900 and was able to demonstrate > > > the same lock up. > > > > > > It appears to be related to a readdir(), as only ls -l causes > > > the file system hang. A 'cat' of large files (quite large) > > > doesn't seem to have the same effect. > > > > > > I set the readdirsize down to 1024 with the -I argument on > > > the mount, but that didn't seem to affect it. > > > > I've seen this problem on 3com cards myself - both 3c509 (ep) and 3c905 > > (vx) cards. I get packet overruns, RX overruns, and fifo underruns > > when trying NFS accesses. With tcpdump on another machine, I can see > > that only the first two or three fragments of an 8K NFS packet ever get > > out. 3com's spec sheet for the 3c905XL 100BT card states it has only > > an 8K buffer, partitioned by default at 4K/4K transmit/receive! > > > ... > > I solved my particular problem by getting Intel EtherExpress Pro/100B > > cards, which have worked flawlessly. The 3com cards are now in DOS > > machines. > > > > -Dan Nelson > > dnelson@emsphone.com > > > > Yes, but, this exact hardware worked flawlessly in 2.1.5. So, > I'm betting something in 2.2.1 is tickling this problem... > > - Dave Rivers -
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704150152.UAA11924>