[Bug 856916] New: Boot Instructions for Starting LSB: Kernel based NFS Daemon and SuSEfirewall2 Create Excessive Delays in Nominal Boot Times
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c0 Summary: Boot Instructions for Starting LSB: Kernel based NFS Daemon and SuSEfirewall2 Create Excessive Delays in Nominal Boot Times Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE 12.3 Version: Final Platform: x86-64 OS/Version: openSUSE 12.3 Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: Bootloader AssignedTo: jsrain@suse.com ReportedBy: secure@aphofis.com QAContact: jsrain@suse.com Found By: --- Blocker: --- User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:26.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/26.0 May need reassignment to X.org...Not sure of What Component Classification to use at All???? :-) During normal boot there are two huge delays the first greater than 100 seconds the second greater than 45 seconds that slow a normal fast boot to be back as slow prior to LSB and UDEV. During my 3 x X_64 PC's boot standard boot from HDD the script stalls for greater than 100 second on my very powerful hardware. The first is LSB: start the kernel based NFS daemon... This takes longer than 100 second The second is LSB: start SuSEfirewall2... This takes longer than 45 seconds and all my X_64 Quad Core running above 3400 clicks with huge amounts of well resourced Video CPU and RAM and System RAM. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Expected Results: I would expect that a Daemon should load without any delays if indead we are just starting more daemons to run Kernel based functions. I can sort of understand NFS as it seems I'm the only one in the world to use NFS; but stage two of SuSEfirewall taking up to 45 seconds is nuts. Both modules should just load one after another despite existence of NFS and Firewall entries and or exceptions. Obviously you are going to need log files and I have 3 x X64 PC's that all exhibit this issue so could you be most clear about the log files you need and well take this one PC at a time if thats o.k with you -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c1 Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |secure@aphofis.com --- Comment #1 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2013-12-31 06:45:20 EST --- With respect to NFS Services why not have it as a cron job that runs ever say....x mins...that way we have some type of dynamic connection to newly available NFS Clients and Servers...Just a thought -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c Jiri Srain <jsrain@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|Bootloader |Basesystem AssignedTo|jsrain@suse.com |bnc-team-screening@forge.pr | |ovo.novell.com QAContact|jsrain@suse.com |qa-bugs@suse.de -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c Xiyuan Liu <xyliu@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |xyliu@suse.com AssignedTo|bnc-team-screening@forge.pr |snwint@suse.com |ovo.novell.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c2 --- Comment #2 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-01-07 12:10:05 EST --- I have another PC that hands on /etc/init.d/boot.local Compatibility. I am sure most of our problems, even the partitioner ones of 13.1 are all related to the different timings that multiple SATA disks have to initiate...On my PC I can extend the wait up to 35 seconds...but I think its the disparity on time between different HDD Manufactures and BUS time until all drives are initiated and not seen as frozen or apparent at a moment of time. Anyway how can I help with log files -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c3 Steffen Winterfeldt <snwint@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |meissner@suse.com AssignedTo|snwint@suse.com |nfbrown@suse.com --- Comment #3 from Steffen Winterfeldt <snwint@suse.com> 2014-01-07 12:06:36 CET --- Moving to maintainer of nfs server package and cc-ing firewall maintainer. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c4 --- Comment #4 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-01-07 21:35:16 EST --- Steffen, what I can't understand is why this cant simply be loaded into the kernel whether or not the NFS server or client directory is currently present or not. Do we not load things into the kernel to perpetuate a standard cycle of repetitive order; one of which should be to check for the presence of both NFS Server or NFS client share from time x to time x Am I the only one who uses NFS Server and Client...I've been battling this since 10.3 and I dont know where my logic fails?????...I would love your honest input please -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c5 Neil Brown <nfbrown@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO InfoProvider| |secure@aphofis.com --- Comment #5 from Neil Brown <nfbrown@suse.com> 2014-02-04 05:55:53 UTC --- It is certainly very surprising that "start the kernel based NFS daemon" would take longer than a few moments. The easiest way to find out where the delay is, is to put a number of lines like echo TRACE-XX `date` >> /tmp/nfs-server.trace in the /etc/init.d/nfsserver file then look at /tmp/nfs-server.trace after a boot. Modify the line each time so that 'XX' is different so we know exactly where each message comes from. Put the trace lines every few lines after: case "$1" in start) That will show you which command in nfsserver is hanging. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c6 --- Comment #6 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-02-05 17:29:48 EST --- Thank you for your instructions Neil. I will have the trace to you as soon as possible. I thought it timely to offer the following. Due to security I have an unusual LAN where there are no DHCP Services Offered and PC's IP's are never resolved into named hots on my LAN. I will leave on NN until I attach trace audits...scott -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c7 Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- InfoProvider|secure@aphofis.com |nfbrown@suse.com --- Comment #7 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-02-06 13:06:45 EST --- Neil, I'm just going to change to Needinfo from you before I attach the trace logs. As I have the opportunity to test and capture any other event that is presenting problems; I can be of value more if you instruct me to use options on NFS...see under...If you see no value in this please replace Needinfo back to me... Sorry to bug you again, but I use NON NFS V4 and even the GUI has an options field but no supporting documentation that is part of a standard install. Can you give me a link for the option's available in this field. BTW. I have raised the loading of basic help on standard install as currently its not auto selected in another bug so that’s in the pipeline, hopefully with indexes back. Neil as you may know I was one of the biggest noises to get NFS as part of the kernel as it made perfect sense that that was where the service should be initiated from so as for other NFS Clients and NFS Services become available on the LAN; their presence has a degree of auto-mount rather than boot PC is a very precise order. The other stalled service is susefirewall phase 2. I would like to hear your thoughts on my comment #6 and #7 so that whilst I am here I can add options that should made no difference in service activation. Being part of the kernel I would trust that options on NON NFSV4 have become obsolete as it sits now, its not really a service that can be started and stopped without killing its associated thread in the Kernel or so my logic would go. The prospect of wide-scale IPV6 Implementation must set a new challenge to the firewall as it maintains its IP tables in the Kernel and currently we have no way of handling multicast internal to the LAN where we should be able to have a Proxy-Report/Query conversation happening now..but lets leave Multicast out for another moment in time..:-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c8 Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- InfoProvider|nfbrown@suse.com |secure@aphofis.com --- Comment #8 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-02-10 17:19:24 EST --- Wow!...The new kernel update has changed the world and normal boot instructions have been modified...I've got new log data that outdated everything past. I thank you for your patience guys I'll get to your log data as soon as possible but updates change. I'll happily supply .nfs logs as well as echo login script execution with the new Kernel under pure X_64 based Networks but I need to use my test PC thats online and I'm currently supplying log data for another bug..leaving on nn for myself now. O.T I'm not going anywhere near the ugly topic of the need to resolve an IP address into a named device within a network in Linux. I know no one wants to touch it for good reason but soon we will not have the choice and I'm not supplying the logic behind the need for change. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c9 --- Comment #9 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-03-19 10:18:13 EST --- Created an attachment (id=582709) --> (http://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=582709) boot_log_001 Boot_log_txt -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c10 --- Comment #10 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-03-19 10:20:12 EST --- Created an attachment (id=582710) --> (http://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=582710) system Log txt only System Log only -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c11 --- Comment #11 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-03-19 10:27:15 EST --- Created an attachment (id=582713) --> (http://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=582713) screen shot 1 of 3 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c12 --- Comment #12 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-03-19 10:27:51 EST --- Created an attachment (id=582714) --> (http://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=582714) screen shot 2 of 3 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c13 Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |NEW InfoProvider|secure@aphofis.com | --- Comment #13 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-03-19 10:29:46 EST --- Created an attachment (id=582715) --> (http://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=582715) screen shot 3 of 3 I have yet had time to run echo trace...Ill try to achieve this today...meanwhile I'll lift NEEDINFO as you have something to work with...My apologies for such a delay -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c14 --- Comment #14 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-03-19 19:53:14 EST --- Created an attachment (id=582772) --> (http://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=582772) Named convestion used will be uploaded last file aa - ee Named convestion used will be uploaded last file aa - ee -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c15 --- Comment #15 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-03-19 19:54:08 EST --- Created an attachment (id=582773) --> (http://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=582773) Named convention used will be uploaded last file aa - ee Named convention used will be uploaded last file aa - ee -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c16 --- Comment #16 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-03-19 19:54:38 EST --- Created an attachment (id=582774) --> (http://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=582774) Named convention used will be uploaded last file aa - ee Named convention used will be uploaded last file aa - ee -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c17 --- Comment #17 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-03-19 19:55:31 EST --- Created an attachment (id=582777) --> (http://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=582777) Named convention used will be uploaded last file aa - ff Named convention used will be uploaded last file aa - ff -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c18 --- Comment #18 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-03-19 19:56:21 EST --- Created an attachment (id=582778) --> (http://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=582778) Named convention used will be uploaded last file aa - ff Named convention used will be uploaded last file aa - ff -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c19 --- Comment #19 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-03-19 19:57:01 EST --- Created an attachment (id=582779) --> (http://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=582779) Named convention used will be uploaded last file aa - ff Named convention used will be uploaded last file aa - ff -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c20 Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|P5 - None |P2 - High QAContact|qa-bugs@suse.de | QAContact| |qa-bugs@suse.de --- Comment #20 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-03-19 20:19:25 EST --- Naming convention legend is as follows, however before I conclude the loading of suse firewall part 2 also causes major delay with current recent kernel and previous kernel. echo -n "Starting kernel based NFS server:" modprobe nfsd #trace starting with starting kernel based NFS server echo TRACE-AA `date` >> /tmp/nfs-serveraa.trace echo TRACE-BB `date` >> /tmp/nfs-serverbb.trace nfs4_bind_mounts # svcgssd; idmapd if [ "$NEED_SVCGSSD" = yes ]; then echo -n " svcgssd" do_start_svcgssd || { rc_status -v rc_exit # exportfs /usr/sbin/exportfs -r # rpc.mountd echo -n " mountd" if [ -n "$MOUNTD_PORT" ] ; then startproc /usr/sbin/rpc.mountd -p $MOUNTD_PORT $VERSION_PARAMS else startproc /usr/sbin/rpc.mountd $VERSION_PARAMS fi || { rc_status -v rc_exit } # rpc.statd echo TRACE-CC `date` >> /tmp/nfs-servercc.trace if [ "$NFS3_SERVER_SUPPORT" != "no" ]; then echo -n " statd" startproc /usr/sbin/rpc.statd --no-notify $STATD_OPTIONS || { rc_status -v rc_exit # sm-notify needs to be run last # trace sm notify options echo TRACE-DD `date` >> /tmp/nfs-serverdd.trace echo -n " sm-notify" /usr/sbin/sm-notify $SM_NOTIFY_OPTIONS # rc_status -v ;; stop) echo -n "Shutting down kernel based NFS server:" # rpc.nfsd # trace shutting down kernel based NFS echo TRACE-EE `date` >> /tmp/nfs-serveree.trace echo -n " nfsd" killproc -n -KILL nfsd || { rc_status -v rc_exit # make sure sm-notify is run on restart, as we have dropped some locks # trace sm notify.pid -f param echo TRACE-FF `date` >> /tmp/nfs-serverff.trace rm -f /run/sm-notify.pid # # rpc.mountd echo -n " mountd" killproc -TERM /usr/sbin/rpc.mountd || { rc_status -v rc_exit Conclusion let the Bugzilla record show I have been bug reporting NFS issues since V10.1 and all have been closed as WONTIFIX or UPSTREAM OR DOWNSTREAM or Assignment to non interested resolution OR the priority lowered to minor so the net resolution and correct of this issue never took place. I can not longer be of assistance solving this needless wast of boot time at the cost of our reputation as a fast O/S suffers. As always this is has and was 100% reproducible and I regret I can be nolonger be of any further assistance. I hope this time, we can achieve a fast booting O/S and restore our superior O/S loading speed to where it rightfully should be as our market promise is at stake to put it simple hence adjustment of priority which you are free to change with discretionary authority Cheers and thanks to all it means a great deal to me that we can now make progress. --- Comment #21 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-03-19 20:23:30 EST --- WTF...I have a bugzilla internal dump warning..trying to satisfy argument on specified line Cheers and thanks to all it means a great deal to me that we can now make progress. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c22 Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |nfbrown@suse.com AssignedTo|nfbrown@suse.com |bnc-team-screening@forge.pr | |ovo.novell.com --- Comment #22 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-03-22 13:13:24 EST --- QA RESET TO DEFAULT FOR...NEAL F. IM NOT SURE WHY ASSIGNMENT STATUS IS STILL RELEVANT TO YOU?????? RESET TO DEFAULT FOR REASSIGNMENT I feel its all Kernel ..In searching for other issues related in delay of boot procedure and in particular I refers to the very very slow staggered wait time for loading Suse Firewall Stage 2 included in trace argument and trace file here. If you want me to raise separate bug for this issue please advise. On this issue I find other open bugs that are not really dupes but adjuncts .Please consider adding dependable BUG # to ensure the 'problem in whole' has adequate information possibly from multiple sources. QA..Please advise and assign BACK as appropriate -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #582778|application/octet-stream |text/plain mime type| | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #582772|application/octet-stream |text/plain mime type| | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #582773|application/octet-stream |text/plain mime type| | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #582774|application/octet-stream |text/plain mime type| | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #582779|application/octet-stream |text/plain mime type| | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #582777|application/octet-stream |text/plain mime type| | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c23 Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO CC| |bwiedemann@suse.com InfoProvider| |secure@aphofis.com --- Comment #23 from Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> 2014-05-02 13:41:05 CEST --- could you try to enable systemd debug logging using systemd.log_level=debug systemd.log_target=kmsg log_buf_len=1M as detailed in http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/Debugging/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c24 --- Comment #24 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-05-03 13:35:23 EST --- Sure Bernhard will do give me a few days to set environment! I have a feeling that our firewall is loading but doing nothing, not even SPI what-so-ever in either direction as many Yast services that need open port run perfectly o.k without inclusion?...Up to you to talk about your end...Scott -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c25 Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |NEW InfoProvider|secure@aphofis.com | --- Comment #25 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-05-06 23:13:37 EST --- Created an attachment (id=588835) --> (http://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=588835) Full boot debug info message Bernhard there is a lot of into on that link. I think your after the attached file info. If not I'll read the link instructions to make clearer sense of them as they cover a lot of different log traces with debug turned on...let me know please -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c26 Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO InfoProvider| |secure@aphofis.com AssignedTo|bnc-team-screening@forge.pr |systemd-maintainers@suse.de |ovo.novell.com | --- Comment #26 from Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> 2014-05-06 15:37:32 CEST --- That looks pretty useful. You can see delays of 130 and 90 seconds in there: 22:08:32 nfsserver[1253]: Starting kernel based NFS server: mountd statd nfsd sm-notify..done 22:08:32 systemd[1]: Started LSB: Start the kernel based NFS daemon. 22:10:43 nfs[1246]: Mounting network file systems ...mount.nfs: Connection timed out 22:10:43 nfs[1246]: ..done 22:10:43 systemd[1]: Started LSB: NFS client services. 22:10:43 systemd[1]: Starting Remote File Systems (Pre). 22:10:43 systemd[1]: Reached target Remote File Systems (Pre). 22:10:43 systemd[1]: Mounting /server_NFS... 22:10:43 systemd[1]: Starting SuSEfirewall2 phase 2... 22:10:43 systemd[1]: Started SuSEfirewall2 phase 2. 22:10:43 SuSEfirewall2: Setting up rules from /etc/sysconfig/SuSEfirewall2 ... 22:10:43 SuSEfirewall2: Firewall rules successfully set 22:12:13 systemd[1]: server_NFS.mount mounting timed out. Stopping. Could you paste details about NFS in your /etc/fstab or /etc/exports ? Are those in fstab reachable when the system is booted? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c27 --- Comment #27 from Dr. Werner Fink <werner@suse.com> 2014-05-06 13:57:23 UTC --- @Bernhard: Why this had become assigned to systemd-maintainers? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c28 Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |NEW InfoProvider|secure@aphofis.com | --- Comment #28 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-05-07 18:34:26 EST --- Before I paste fstab and export details for NON NFSV4 In short Yes there is no delay when NFS dependency is present and in short why should it be necessary as we should be a lot more teck inventive in the way we currently timeout?? and force absurd delay in just turning a PC on! No one wants to have to set policy of boot PC #10 first, then #3, then #8, then #2 and say it will all boot quickly and all NFs work only if you follow this procedure in turning on PC's that way??!! I dont know the full extent of options avail on NFS load but those option we need to make cleaver and inventive use of as standard as clearly a PC that needs both 130+90 second delay just to be usable makes us look like windoze or worse. I get embarrassed for our product when I am asked why and explain the delay is caused by us not being cleaver enough when we are just that as we have a better alternative O/S out there. The logic in moving NFS to be kernel managed was, I believe, to dynamically disconnect and reconnect during the session that dependant PC's become offline and later online during any time frame. Just Like Netware shell dynamically connect reconnect when other Network drives become available and not available if that comparison helps a bit.? Re Firewall. I'm not sure its doing anything except loading? Example. NTP can run with or without firewall exception as others can also. I'm not sure if there is any fictional attempt by susefirewall2 to enforce SPI. I am of the option that currently, design or failure; that there seems NO SPI in either inbound or outbound traffic. None the less the delay is no acceptable as the question must be what is it doing to take 90 seconds? Ideas? I'm out of them with this. Finally sorry unable to assist with assignment classification. I just write the bugs and supply info...:-) Bernhard please reinstate NEEDINFO when you Need fstab clarity etc. Cheers Scott -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c29 Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO InfoProvider| |secure@aphofis.com AssignedTo|systemd-maintainers@suse.de |bnc-team-screening@forge.pr | |ovo.novell.com --- Comment #29 from Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> 2014-05-07 11:41:29 CEST --- please try to drop nfs entries from fstab and use autofs if you want them mounted on demand instead of on boot this is supported in openSUSE since ages and is the same in all Linux distributions I'm not sure firewall is really taking any time but I seem to remember that NFS is not working well together with it, because of using dynamic port numbers so the easiest fix would be to disable the firewall. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c30 Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |NEW InfoProvider|secure@aphofis.com | --- Comment #30 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-05-08 10:20:08 EST --- (In reply to comment #29)
please try to drop nfs entries from fstab and use autofs if you want them mounted on demand instead of on boot this is supported in openSUSE since ages and is the same in all Linux distributions
I'm not sure firewall is really taking any time but I seem to remember that NFS is not working well together with it, because of using dynamic port numbers so the easiest fix would be to disable the firewall.
Thank you so much! No-one has ever provided details on options of NFS and the world and product would be a better place if they were publicly available. I know you dont want to change Yast but everyone depends on that as they want a GUI. Both of us are happy with editing files and command prompts but the rest of the world just wants to use the product. Personally I hate GUI's but world market demands and depends on them. Users wont touch any product that required manual file edit or command lines. Suggest you change Yast>NFS>Help to include details of demand NFS options 1st. Second would recommend changes to KDE/Gnome control module's to include GUI NFS Auto demand and options. I know this crosses into kde's/Gnome responsibility but to save our product for both Enterprise and open users in the whole world that need Network Share ability NOW via GUI's Our product is so technically better than Windoze starting at our file system. We need to give users a better reason to use Suse Linux that can replace O/S the world over but up to use to give them, at very least, GUI Networking ability! Rather than go off Bugzilla, change classification to 'usability' No more talk WE have to deliver now or give up if only teck people know how to edit files and create shell files to do auto/demand Network share mode. Ideally is must ultimately completely reside in the kernel to run and maintain a dynamic Network share ability.That's means being smart and taking time but once done, its there forever! Can you provide URL for howto and create info that way and just include the same link in Yast>NFS>Help text. I have an outstanding bug just to load local help as being part of default pattern install and have its contents indexable. The product is so wonderful but we keep loosing sight of usability confined to just teck people. RE: Firewall..90 seconds is 90 seconds and the suggestion to a user to stop auto load and load firewall on demand just its commercially acceptable. Agin us tecks can do it but same question..Why should it make any difference to a user 90 seconds is just too long whatever the reasoning. We need to work out the smarts and give users usability in return as no user it going to put up with technical logic...they are to busy just using our product :-) Your thoughts please and keep this alive please and please CC add Jiri's Novell email;-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c31 Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|bnc-team-screening@forge.pr |mvidner@suse.com |ovo.novell.com | --- Comment #31 from Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> 2014-05-13 13:30:14 CEST --- btw: bug 863749 could be related, so please install the latest updates and re-test There are probably two rather different areas that can need improvement for the Yast nfs-mounting-on-demand and the better firewall-NFS-cooperation so I added the maintainer of yast2-nfs-client (and SuSEfirewall2 bugowner is already there) As for GUIs, I know of the opposite, which is that for many seriously working people, APIs or CLIs are a must-have and any GUI-only application is useless, because it can not be automated or integrated. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c32 --- Comment #32 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-05-13 22:25:01 EST ---
As for GUIs, I know of the opposite, which is that for many seriously working people, APIs or CLIs are a must-have and any GUI-only application is useless, because it can not be automated or integrated.
I share your logic very much....Bernhard Will install latest updates and retest. Further I can provide further audit streaming from Significant Hardware Protection that exists well above software firewall as I have many ALG's Filtering of most all TCP Packet information and contents from UDP Packet to assist with Susefirewall analysts. Creating the test data in the first instant will be difficult but what follows subject to suse2 is the easy bit for me. Not sure how I can help with only later analysis available...Please advise if that would assist many thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c33 Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO InfoProvider| |bwiedemann@suse.com --- Comment #33 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-05-25 09:13:17 EST --- (In reply to comment #31)
btw: bug 863749 could be related, so please install the latest updates and re-test
My apologies for the delay. The Australian financial accounting year is from 31June - 1July. ATM Everyone is preparing the tax for the financial year ending 31 July and just about all .AU is in a holding pattern; especially large companies. Some overseas based companies have a tax year concession and able to report December 31 -1January financial year if their parent company is largely overseas. In the mean time can you please advise version numbers/dates/etc. of both Susefirewall2 and current bug issue re NFS to re-test and supply info for. Placed on NEEDINFO for you so as not to loose continuity and current activity status -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c34 Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |NEW InfoProvider|bwiedemann@suse.com | --- Comment #34 from Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> 2014-05-26 10:23:01 CEST --- on openSUSE-13.1 you need nfs-utils-1.2.8-4.13.1 or later 12.3 could also be affected, but there was not an update for nfs-client and please disable SuSEFirewall2 to avoid it interfering. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c35 --- Comment #35 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-05-26 19:41:11 EST --- 13.1 X_ 64 is not an installable option as it has insurmountable issues with disk partitioning on install and writing bootloader! Even if I override auto partition I have 3 x 64 bit CPU that do not have UEFI BIOS and I had insurmountable problems with install creating the boot-loader that wouldn’t even restart the installation either auto or forced restart when it fell over. If there's been a factory rebuild of original 13.1 I'll download and try again?? Yes appreciate to halt firewall whilst testing. " BTW Bernhard who's the Firewall teck email. Just want to ask what it does as I cant see SPI happening in either direction...cheers. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c36 --- Comment #36 from Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> 2014-05-28 08:17:07 CEST --- I applied the patch from 13.1 on the 12.3 package, so please try this one: http://download.opensuse.org/update/12.3-test/x86_64/nfs-client-1.2.7-2.22.1... and tell, whether this works better. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c37 Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO InfoProvider| |bwiedemann@suse.com --- Comment #37 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-06-10 17:38:21 EST --- (In reply to comment #36)
I applied the patch from 13.1 on the 12.3 package, so please try this one:
http://download.opensuse.org/update/12.3-test/x86_64/nfs-client-1.2.7-2.22.1...
and tell, whether this works better.
Sorry Bernhard the URL cannot locate a matched object file! Can you please check it for me. I've got another consequence if this but in a reversed role which makes sound logic and actuality! It appears that if the NFS Sever can be located at time of NFS Client boot...Its all good UNTIL I remove the NFS Server. In the absence of the once mounted drive, saving any file to a local drive will timeout to try to re-establish its lost mounter Server_NFS. It can also take in excess of 90 seconds just to save a file in this situation. It's very predicable in reverse order and I'm anxious to get the right logs to you as anything Kernel based has sometimes so much testing to be done! I've changed to NEEDINFO for you Cheers -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c38 Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |NEW InfoProvider|bwiedemann@suse.com | --- Comment #38 from Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> 2014-06-10 10:00:50 CEST --- This long hanging is to be expected and normal. There are only two ways to handle this case of connection loss selected via fstab mount options: hard: wait forever until the server returns soft: give up and return an error to the application I think, the file-not-found error is because the update was now released so you should get it with zypper up nfs-client -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c39 --- Comment #39 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-06-10 18:22:08 EST --- Unreal and sorry for the delay. Yes I have the file .AU has an end of financial year on 31 June so everyone is either spending their budget or trying to rein it in! ..any chance we might get the fstab in Yast in the near future! I'd much rather edit the file...usability is always a bigger problem the younger the generation and asking a netadmin to edit a file is like asking for water into wine! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c40 --- Comment #40 from Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> 2014-06-10 14:22:44 CEST --- just run yast2 disk (needs yast2-storage package installed which it is by default) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c41 --- Comment #41 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-06-15 13:22:40 EST --- (In reply to comment #38)
This long hanging is to be expected and normal. There are only two ways to handle this case of connection loss selected via fstab mount options: hard: wait forever until the server returns soft: give up and return an error to the application
I think, the file-not-found error is because the update was now released so you should get it with zypper up nfs-client
I have taken a very outside look at what we ship by default. We provide NFS Services via via Yast with great ease so the default we ship is the root of our problems. I think its better to ship NFS services as we do but using the default of soft rather than our current wait forever. Here's where your overview of the project's perspective development comes in. Sharing Network drives is fundamental and everyone expects it to just work. Network share's are now mandatory not 'a like to have option' when people buy Enterprise or use Open. Yes I can hear you in the background...but with Enterprise there is most certainly Netware File Services available but until we have a Linux based Netware File Server we'd better get our own house in order. Can we simply ship NFS Services via the API to use the soft option. There must be a disadvantage there somewhere. Asking people to go from NFS Services API and put them in the 'Partitioner' is the most frightening thought I could. imagine. The reason I pushed to kernel based NFS services should not be from the point of just retrying the mount or dismount command via the scheduler. If our kernel based NFS services cant just sit there in perpetuity watching network services appear or disappear from the other PC's that join or shutdown; we need a rethink on how we apply this to the kernel. As we both discussed the loss of a once associated NFS Client Server relationship and you remove its server by downing the PC; simply saving a file is 90 seconds in delay! This is where I have the luxury of saying this is not commercially acceptable so lets toss the idea of managing NFS by the kernel that doesn’t cause any delay. Spending 90 second delay in saving a file is just not happening in a viable alt O/S...We have got to get smart so lets get a few more dynamic idea together as what we are currently doing isn’t happening well! Your serve :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c42 Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO InfoProvider| |bwiedemann@suse.com --- Comment #42 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-06-22 14:05:37 EST ---
From what I understand of this log, the kernel boys are giving me a 90 second grace period for NFS services Soft: Option or not, no matter what.
We don't need a grace period of devices to be or not be there at time of boot. Waiting for a HDD to come online at boot is perfectly ok but my logic is NFS services are either there or not there at boot. I dont thing we want to offer a 90 second grace period just because NFS Services are config at all but thanks to the kernel boys anyway.Adding + 90 secons to boot each PC and my coffee is made but now also gone cold of me! My whole logic is if we are going to move NFS Services to be handled by the kernel, NFS drives mount and dismount should be a constant dynamic process transparent to the user, no delay. We seem to be stuck half way in starting services sure but they shouldn’t include NFS. We've got part of NFS Services is the kernel which should simply pass any future dynamic mount's dis-mount’s to the scheduler to keep ever watching for. No one wants to wait + 90 seconds just to boot a PC just to see if NFS Services appear. Nor does anyone want to wait 90 seconds to save a local file, if at that time, NFS Services are not longer present. I might have this log interpreted all wrong and I really hope I do! Bernhard, please tell me I've got it all wrong and my logic is stupid???? 2014-06-22T13:30:28.780029+10:00 multivac010 bluetoothd[1894]: Bluetooth daemon 4.101 2014-06-22T13:30:28.796237+10:00 multivac010 dbus-daemon[693]: dbus[693]: [system] Successfully activated service 'org.bluez' 2014-06-22T13:30:28.796462+10:00 multivac010 dbus[693]: [system] Successfully activated service 'org.bluez' 2014-06-22T13:30:28.796617+10:00 multivac010 bluetoothd[1894]: Starting SDP server 2014-06-22T13:30:28.796794+10:00 multivac010 bluetoothd[1894]: bluetoothd[1894]: Starting SDP server 2014-06-22T13:30:28.796955+10:00 multivac010 systemd[1]: Started Bluetooth service. 2014-06-22T13:30:29.049681+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 142.649087] Bluetooth: Core ver 2.16 2014-06-22T13:30:29.049704+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 142.649110] NET: Registered protocol family 31 2014-06-22T13:30:29.049705+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 142.649111] Bluetooth: HCI device and connection manager initialized 2014-06-22T13:30:29.049707+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 142.649120] Bluetooth: HCI socket layer initialized 2014-06-22T13:30:29.049708+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 142.649121] Bluetooth: L2CAP socket layer initialized 2014-06-22T13:30:29.049709+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 142.649125] Bluetooth: SCO socket layer initialized 2014-06-22T13:30:29.324525+10:00 multivac010 bluetoothd[1894]: bluetoothd[1894]: Parsing /etc/bluetooth/input.conf failed: No such file or directory 2014-06-22T13:30:29.324673+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 142.923113] Bluetooth: BNEP (Ethernet Emulation) ver 1.3 2014-06-22T13:30:29.324686+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 142.923116] Bluetooth: BNEP filters: protocol multicast 2014-06-22T13:30:29.324687+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 142.923124] Bluetooth: BNEP socket layer initialized 2014-06-22T13:30:29.324782+10:00 multivac010 bluetoothd[1894]: bluetoothd[1894]: Parsing /etc/bluetooth/audio.conf failed: No such file or directory 2014-06-22T13:30:29.324985+10:00 multivac010 bluetoothd[1894]: bluetoothd[1894]: Bluetooth Management interface initialized 2014-06-22T13:30:29.325159+10:00 multivac010 bluetoothd[1894]: Parsing /etc/bluetooth/input.conf failed: No such file or directory 2014-06-22T13:30:29.325321+10:00 multivac010 bluetoothd[1894]: Parsing /etc/bluetooth/audio.conf failed: No such file or directory 2014-06-22T13:30:29.325471+10:00 multivac010 bluetoothd[1894]: Bluetooth Management interface initialized 2014-06-22T13:30:29.913007+10:00 multivac010 rtkit-daemon[1876]: Successfully made thread 1912 of process 1912 (/usr/bin/pulseaudio) owned by 'scott' high priority at nice level -11. 2014-06-22T13:30:29.913220+10:00 multivac010 rtkit-daemon[1876]: Supervising 5 threads of 2 processes of 1 users. 2014-06-22T13:30:29.913540+10:00 multivac010 pulseaudio[1912]: [pulseaudio] pid.c: Daemon already running. 2014-06-22T13:30:30.265412+10:00 multivac010 rtkit-daemon[1876]: Successfully made thread 1935 of process 1935 (/usr/bin/pulseaudio) owned by 'scott' high priority at nice level -11. 2014-06-22T13:30:30.265653+10:00 multivac010 rtkit-daemon[1876]: Supervising 5 threads of 2 processes of 1 users. 2014-06-22T13:30:30.265834+10:00 multivac010 pulseaudio[1935]: [pulseaudio] pid.c: Daemon already running. 2014-06-22T13:30:31.273238+10:00 multivac010 systemd[1]: Mounting FUSE Control File System... 2014-06-22T13:30:31.273674+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 144.866156] fuse init (API version 7.20) 2014-06-22T13:30:31.276139+10:00 multivac010 systemd[1]: Mounted FUSE Control File System. 2014-06-22T13:30:32.293685+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 145.883262] svc: 192.168.1.30, port=743: unknown version (4 for prog 100003, nfsd) 2014-06-22T13:30:32.325096+10:00 multivac010 rpc.mountd[1305]: refused mount request from 192.168.1.30 for /scott_server (/scott_server): unmatched host 2014-06-22T13:30:32.334677+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 145.924878] svc: 192.168.1.30, port=703: unknown version (4 for prog 100003, nfsd) 2014-06-22T13:30:32.336400+10:00 multivac010 rpc.mountd[1305]: refused mount request from 192.168.1.30 for /home/scott (/home/scott): unmatched host 2014-06-22T13:30:32.403680+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 145.992851] svc: 192.168.1.30, port=914: unknown version (4 for prog 100003, nfsd) 2014-06-22T13:30:32.404605+10:00 multivac010 rpc.mountd[1305]: refused mount request from 192.168.1.30 for /home/scott (/home/scott): unmatched host 2014-06-22T13:30:32.414667+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 146.004650] svc: 192.168.1.30, port=765: unknown version (4 for prog 100003, nfsd) 2014-06-22T13:30:32.417074+10:00 multivac010 rpc.mountd[1305]: refused mount request from 192.168.1.30 for /scott_server (/scott_server): unmatched host 2014-06-22T13:30:40.300236+10:00 multivac010 rtkit-daemon[1876]: Successfully made thread 2020 of process 2020 (/usr/bin/pulseaudio) owned by 'scott' high priority at nice level -11. 2014-06-22T13:30:40.300468+10:00 multivac010 rtkit-daemon[1876]: Supervising 5 threads of 2 processes of 1 users. 2014-06-22T13:30:40.300673+10:00 multivac010 pulseaudio[2020]: [pulseaudio] pid.c: Daemon already running. 2014-06-22T13:30:55.350708+10:00 multivac010 polkitd[1716]: Registered Authentication Agent for unix-session:2 (system bus name :1.48 [/usr/lib64/kde4/libexec/polkit-kde-authentication-agent-1], object path /org/kde/PolicyKit1/AuthenticationAgent, locale en_GB.UTF-8) 2014-06-22T13:32:08.352402+10:00 multivac010 dbus-daemon[693]: dbus[693]: [system] Activating service name='org.freedesktop.PackageKit' (using servicehelper) 2014-06-22T13:32:08.352819+10:00 multivac010 dbus[693]: [system] Activating service name='org.freedesktop.PackageKit' (using servicehelper) 2014-06-22T13:32:08.712077+10:00 multivac010 dbus-daemon[693]: dbus[693]: [system] Successfully activated service 'org.freedesktop.PackageKit' 2014-06-22T13:32:08.712100+10:00 multivac010 dbus[693]: [system] Successfully activated service 'org.freedesktop.PackageKit' 2014-06-22T13:32:43.647284+10:00 multivac010 dbus-daemon[693]: dbus[693]: [system] Activating service name='org.kde.powerdevil.backlighthelper' (using servicehelper) 2014-06-22T13:32:43.647632+10:00 multivac010 dbus[693]: [system] Activating service name='org.kde.powerdevil.backlighthelper' (using servicehelper) 2014-06-22T13:32:43.651475+10:00 multivac010 dbus-daemon[693]: no kernel backlight interface found 2014-06-22T13:32:43.659740+10:00 multivac010 dbus-daemon[693]: dbus[693]: [system] Successfully activated service 'org.kde.powerdevil.backlighthelper' 2014-06-22T13:32:43.659997+10:00 multivac010 dbus[693]: [system] Successfully activated service 'org.kde.powerdevil.backlighthelper' 2014-06-22T13:33:58.646547+10:00 multivac010 dbus-daemon[693]: dbus[693]: [system] Activating service name='org.kde.powerdevil.backlighthelper' (using servicehelper) 2014-06-22T13:33:58.647016+10:00 multivac010 dbus[693]: [system] Activating service name='org.kde.powerdevil.backlighthelper' (using servicehelper) 2014-06-22T13:33:58.650845+10:00 multivac010 dbus-daemon[693]: no kernel backlight interface found 2014-06-22T13:33:58.659203+10:00 multivac010 dbus-daemon[693]: dbus[693]: [system] Successfully activated service 'org.kde.powerdevil.backlighthelper' 2014-06-22T13:33:58.659415+10:00 multivac010 dbus[693]: [system] Successfully activated service 'org.kde.powerdevil.backlighthelper' 2014-06-22T13:34:18.057719+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 371.011108] svc: 192.168.1.30, port=732: unknown version (4 for prog 100003, nfsd) 2014-06-22T13:34:18.087595+10:00 multivac010 rpc.mountd[1305]: refused mount request from 192.168.1.30 for /scott_server (/scott_server): unmatched host 2014-06-22T13:34:18.089689+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 371.043224] svc: 192.168.1.30, port=706: unknown version (4 for prog 100003, nfsd) 2014-06-22T13:34:18.090892+10:00 multivac010 rpc.mountd[1305]: refused mount request from 192.168.1.30 for /home/scott (/home/scott): unmatched host 2014-06-22T13:35:13.647694+10:00 multivac010 dbus-daemon[693]: dbus[693]: [system] Activating service name='org.kde.powerdevil.backlighthelper' (using servicehelper) 2014-06-22T13:35:13.648004+10:00 multivac010 dbus[693]: [system] Activating service name='org.kde.powerdevil.backlighthelper' (using servicehelper) 2014-06-22T13:35:13.651911+10:00 multivac010 dbus-daemon[693]: no kernel backlight interface found 2014-06-22T13:35:13.660323+10:00 multivac010 dbus-daemon[693]: dbus[693]: [system] Successfully activated service 'org.kde.powerdevil.backlighthelper' 2014-06-22T13:35:13.660534+10:00 multivac010 dbus[693]: [system] Successfully activated service 'org.kde.powerdevil.backlighthelper' 2014-06-22T13:35:27.479719+10:00 multivac010 dbus-daemon[693]: dbus[693]: [system] Activating service name='org.kde.powerdevil.backlighthelper' (using servicehelper) 2014-06-22T13:35:27.479821+10:00 multivac010 dbus[693]: [system] Activating service name='org.kde.powerdevil.backlighthelper' (using servicehelper) 2014-06-22T13:35:27.484529+10:00 multivac010 dbus-daemon[693]: no kernel backlight interface found 2014-06-22T13:35:27.492648+10:00 multivac010 dbus-daemon[693]: dbus[693]: [system] Successfully activated service 'org.kde.powerdevil.backlighthelper' 2014-06-22T13:35:27.492877+10:00 multivac010 dbus[693]: [system] Successfully activated service 'org.kde.powerdevil.backlighthelper' 2014-06-22T13:35:41.725869+10:00 multivac010 su: (to root) scott on /dev/pts/2 2014-06-22T13:35:41.726112+10:00 multivac010 su: pam_unix(su:session): session opened for user root by (uid=1000) 2014-06-22T13:35:41.771977+10:00 multivac010 su: pam_unix(su:session): session closed for user root 2014-06-22T13:35:41.889706+10:00 multivac010 su: (to root) scott on /dev/pts/2 2014-06-22T13:35:41.890025+10:00 multivac010 su: pam_unix(su:session): session opened for user root by (uid=1000) 2014-06-22T13:36:28.819219+10:00 multivac010 systemd[1]: Stopping LSB: Start the kernel based NFS daemon... 2014-06-22T13:36:28.844700+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 501.429517] nfsd: last server has exited, flushing export cache 2014-06-22T13:36:28.966662+10:00 multivac010 rpc.mountd[1305]: Caught signal 15, un-registering and exiting. 2014-06-22T13:36:29.037147+10:00 multivac010 nfsserver[2339]: Shutting down kernel based NFS server: nfsd statd mountd..done 2014-06-22T13:36:29.042804+10:00 multivac010 systemd[1]: Stopped LSB: Start the kernel based NFS daemon. 2014-06-22T13:36:29.053736+10:00 multivac010 systemd[1]: Starting LSB: Start the kernel based NFS daemon... 2014-06-22T13:36:29.089393+10:00 multivac010 rpc.mountd[2378]: Version 1.2.7 starting 2014-06-22T13:36:29.096345+10:00 multivac010 rpc.statd[2381]: Version 1.2.7 starting 2014-06-22T13:36:29.096577+10:00 multivac010 rpc.statd[2381]: Flags: TI-RPC 2014-06-22T13:36:29.116691+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 501.700725] NFSD: Using /var/lib/nfs/v4recovery as the NFSv4 state recovery directory 2014-06-22T13:36:29.116705+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 501.700736] NFSD: starting 90-second grace period 2014-06-22T13:36:29.116900+10:00 multivac010 sm-notify[2390]: Version 1.2.7 starting 2014-06-22T13:36:29.117190+10:00 multivac010 nfsserver[2359]: Starting kernel based NFS server: mountd statd nfsd sm-notify..done 2014-06-22T13:36:29.117571+10:00 multivac010 systemd[1]: Started LSB: Start the kernel based NFS daemon. 2014-06-22T13:36:31.368789+10:00 multivac010 su: pam_unix(su:session): session closed for user root 2014-06-22T13:36:49.263823+10:00 multivac010 su: (to root) scott on /dev/pts/2 2014-06-22T13:36:49.264064+10:00 multivac010 su: pam_unix(su:session): session opened for user root by (uid=1000) 2014-06-22T13:36:49.269307+10:00 multivac010 su: pam_unix(su:session): session closed for user root 2014-06-22T13:36:49.386650+10:00 multivac010 su: (to root) scott on /dev/pts/2 2014-06-22T13:36:49.386964+10:00 multivac010 su: pam_unix(su:session): session opened for user root by (uid=1000) 2014-06-22T13:36:53.091680+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 525.608768] device-mapper: uevent: version 1.0.3 2014-06-22T13:36:53.091703+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 525.608820] device-mapper: ioctl: 4.23.0-ioctl (2012-07-25) initialised: dm-devel@redhat.com 2014-06-22T13:36:54.097682+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 526.611370] st: Version 20101219, fixed bufsize 32768, s/g segs 256 2014-06-22T13:36:54.152683+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 526.666532] BIOS EDD facility v0.16 2004-Jun-25, 0 devices found 2014-06-22T13:36:54.152702+10:00 multivac010 kernel: [ 526.666535] EDD information not available. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c43 --- Comment #43 from Neil Brown <nfbrown@suse.com> 2014-06-24 02:00:09 UTC --- The 90 second grace period provided by the NFS server gives clients a chance to reclaim resources (typically locks) that they held before the NFS server crashed. During the grace period, NFSv3 will not allow any new file locks to be taken, and NFSv4 will also not allow any files to be opened. This does not cause any delay for the NFS server. It only causes a delay for any NFS clients. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c44 Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |NEW InfoProvider|bwiedemann@suse.com | --- Comment #44 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-06-24 12:31:19 EST --- Neil I understand its the client but realistically 90sencds is way way too long just to check file locks. I'll concede with max 10 seconds nothing less as we look like the O/S has just stalled or fallen over and ordinary users facing 90 seconds think the worse rather than the norm. We just look so bad with 90 seconds now competitors can do a full reload in 15. ATM I haven’t the nerve to test this under S2Ram or S2Disk...God knows what's happing there but will get to it...Removing Needinfo from bwiedemann@suse.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c45 --- Comment #45 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-08-13 08:30:48 EST --- In closing I'd like to leave 2 System Logs of the last 2 boot processes and worry-some ancillary issues. They indicate what can only be felt as disturbing action via the client NFS while the PC's were left running. At not 1 time was the client NFS able to regain itself despite trying to restart NFS client services manually via Yast>Network Services>NFS client a few times during that period without success. I have the the 'soft option' as a permanent state of the NFS client's config, which, as I have described, still permits a 90 second courtesy wait time just to ensure NFS Servers do perchance become available. It is this courtesy wait period I would like changed to 10 seconds. As I have time enough not only to make a cup of coffee but its now cold when I do get access to the PC. It was this exact analogy that was used to describe booting an office full of say 10 computers under XP and extended to Vista 32bit but is somewhat moderated by its 64 bit version, irrespective of hardware performance: Microsoft was in. Now windows 8 can do a full load in less that 15 second and a recovery in under 10 and you have a serviceable accessible PC. The second system Log still shows the unknown time delay in executing phase 2 of Suse Firewall part 2 however it auto loaded NFS client services as I have changed the order in which I boot NFS Servers first then NFS clients seconds. Knowingly having to turn on PC's in a certain order just to gain short boot times in NFS clients is understandable in my test environment. Move that to an Enterprise office and you'd have to publish a procedure on what PC's to start first and in what order to actually gain access to NFS Services and/or wait the combined 120 seconds for a NFS Client and Suse-firewall part2 PC to be in a state of usability. If the NFS Servers weren’t available, the user still has a unusable PC without ANY NFS Services after 120 second and cant regain the until they re-boot their PC. In my mind having to publish an office procedure on what PC to boot first and in what order speaks to the technology of a decade ago and certainly now worthy of our enhanced O/S in the first instance. What unbelievable flexibility and sheer processing grunt we can give with our O/S we let this all fail due to both these 2 issues. Changing the NFS wait time to 10 seconds will assist dramatically, however we're better than that in being able to solve this issue far more eloquently and this is where I will leave the status of the bug for you. Please excuse my enthusiasm for knowing we have a far better O/S completely discord to NFS Services and SuseFirewall 2 loading we have on offer and this extends to our Enterprise Product but off course in this situation the Enterprise client is running a Netware File Server to permit the sharing of files etc etc and the added burden of requiring a dedicated Samba Server as well I suppose. Now is this still an eloquent solution for an Enterprise client to be in? Why not simpley fix NFS Services and permit simple file services as a adjunct to running the dedicated Samba Server in this Enterprise Mix of open and transparent file access. The questions are, off course rhetorical ones. Subsequent attachments are of the aforesaid System Logs -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c46 --- Comment #46 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-08-13 08:37:12 EST --- Created an attachment (id=602140) --> (http://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=602140) System Log as described in the text as first example 1 of 2 parts System Log as described in the text as first example 1 of 2 parts -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c47 --- Comment #47 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-08-13 08:38:10 EST --- Created an attachment (id=602141) --> (http://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=602141) System Log as described in the text as second example 2 of 2 parts System Log as described in the text as second example 2 of 2 parts -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856916#c48 Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mvidner@suse.com AssignedTo|mvidner@suse.com |bnc-team-screening@forge.pr | |ovo.novell.com --- Comment #48 from Scott Couston <secure@aphofis.com> 2014-08-30 13:48:41 EST --- Originally the Assigned email was mvidner@suse.com however this is still sitting at a NEW status. We need to make a decision about a 90 second courtesy delay in NFS Client, even with the soft option and an attentional 25 seconds wait for part 2 of suse firewall = 115. A delay in booting of a PC of 115 seconds if they are using NFS clients and servers just isnt good enough for the market place. We look bad as if we are still stuck in the MS Windows V3.0 to Windows 7...their OS is still the same, as well as the file format...so adding 115 seconds to just boot a PC when its associated NFS Server isnt around muskes us look bad. We’ve got the best OS on the planet but if you use NFS go make a cup of coffee and also let it get cold and then you'll be able to use your PC -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
participants (1)
-
bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com