similar to: sftp performance problem, cured by TCP_NODELAY

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1555 Summary: add hard link and attribute extensions to sftp-server Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 5.1p1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: sftp-server AssignedTo: unassigned-bugs at mindrot.org

> On Dec 3, 2007 5:19 AM, Miklos Szeredi <miklos at szeredi.hu> wrote: > > > Yes it is weird. I hope you can help me with this problem as sshfs is > > > so much simpler than nfs. > > > > Can you please do one more thing: start up sshfs normally, then on the > > server do a strace of the sftp-server process: > > > > strace -o /tmp/strace.log

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1399 Summary: add statfs extension to sftp-server Classification: Unclassified Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: -current Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: sftp-server AssignedTo: bitbucket at

This time the problem is that the ssh server only sets TCP_NODELAY for interactive (tty) sessions or if X11 forwarding is enabled. Neither of which are true for the use of the sftp subsystem. This hurts upload performance for sftp/sshfs. I'm not sure why this hasn't cropped up earlier. Were there any TCP_NODELAY related changes in the sshd code recently? Is there a reason not to

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1400 Summary: add atomic rename extension to sftp-server Classification: Unclassified Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: -current Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: sftp-server AssignedTo: bitbucket at

On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 01:52:41PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 12:36 PM Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 10:15:14AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 9:49 PM Vivek Goyal <vgoyal at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > >

On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 01:52:41PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 12:36 PM Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 10:15:14AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 9:49 PM Vivek Goyal <vgoyal at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > >

I: Program returns random data in a function E: libguestfs no-return-in-nonvoid-function guestmount.c:75 The function fuse_opt_add_opt_escaped has only one caller and a return code is not checked. Signed-off-by: Olaf Hering <olaf at aepfle.de> --- diff --git a/fuse/guestmount.c b/fuse/guestmount.c index 17e94ba..1eb0553 100644 --- a/fuse/guestmount.c +++ b/fuse/guestmount.c @@ -49,7 +49,7

On Sun, Sep 08, 2019 at 07:53:55PM +0800, piaojun wrote: > > > On 2019/9/6 19:52, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 12:36 PM Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha at redhat.com> wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 10:15:14AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > >>> On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 9:49 PM Vivek Goyal <vgoyal at redhat.com> wrote:

Dear all, I am looking for the status on the hardlink patches that were published on this list last february by Miklos Szeredi? I'd really like to have hardlink support in sftp. This would in turn enable hardlinks in sshfs and make incremental rsync backups to remote filesystems possible. can someone tell me if these patches will be incorporated in openssh? The patches can be found under

Couple more bikesheddy things: Is there ever a reason to use a non __builtin_const_p(perms)? Maybe that should be a BUILD_BUG_ON too BUILD_BUG_ON(!builtin_const_p_perms) My brain of little size gets confused by the BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(foo) + vs BUILD_BUG_ON(foo); as it just seems like more text for the same content. Is there any value on the "_ZERO(foo) +" I don't understand?

Couple more bikesheddy things: Is there ever a reason to use a non __builtin_const_p(perms)? Maybe that should be a BUILD_BUG_ON too BUILD_BUG_ON(!builtin_const_p_perms) My brain of little size gets confused by the BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(foo) + vs BUILD_BUG_ON(foo); as it just seems like more text for the same content. Is there any value on the "_ZERO(foo) +" I don't understand?

The full description of this bug is here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838592 and the effect it has on OpenStack is described here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835466#c9 Rich.

And while we are at it, can you please comment on these patches as well, originally submitted around one year ago. Oh, and I think we can agree, that the secsh-filexfer standardization is dead, so there's not much point in trying to support newer protocol versions, which don't have statfs anyway. Thanks, Miklos ----- This is needed to be able to support statfs operation on an SSH

Here's a patch that adds support for the creation of hard links over SFTP. Hard links are not used very often nowdays, but they do still have their uses and this is currently the most often requested improvement for SSHFS. To detect hard links the st_nlink, st_dev and st_ino attributes are usually used. I'll also post patches adding extensions for these and other attributes. Please

> > p.s. For an in depth analysis of TCP_CORK read Christiopher Baus' excelent > article: http://www.baus.net/on-tcp_cork Thanks for this pointer. I'd been meaning to reply on this thread, but hadn't got around to it, primarily because I didn't really understand TCP_CORK (the linux manpage is, as usual, fairly unclear on what exactly it does). Now I understand! > >

Hi, We have couple of places which can result in deadlock. This patch series fixes these. We can be called with fc->bg_lock (for background requests) while submitting a request. This leads to two constraints. - We can't end requests in submitter's context and call fuse_end_request() as it tries to take fc->bg_lock as well. So queue these requests on a list and use a worker to

Joe Perches <joe at perches.com> writes: > On Sun, 2014-03-16 at 22:00 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: >> On Mon, 2014-03-17 at 14:25 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: >> >> > Erk, our tests are insufficient. Testbuilding an allmodconfig with this >> > now: >> >> Good idea. >> >> > diff --git a/include/linux/moduleparam.h

Joe Perches <joe at perches.com> writes: > On Sun, 2014-03-16 at 22:00 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: >> On Mon, 2014-03-17 at 14:25 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: >> >> > Erk, our tests are insufficient. Testbuilding an allmodconfig with this >> > now: >> >> Good idea. >> >> > diff --git a/include/linux/moduleparam.h

From: John Hubbard <jhubbard at nvidia.com> Hi, This is mostly Jerome's work, converting the block/bio and related areas to call put_user_page*() instead of put_page(). Because I've changed Jerome's patches, in some cases significantly, I'd like to get his feedback before we actually leave him listed as the author (he might want to disown some or all of these). I added a