| Summary: | sys-kernel/gentoo-sources: Unable to mount cifs 1.0 shares with kernel 5.15.0 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Davyd McColl <davydm> |
| Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Gentoo Kernel Bug Wranglers and Kernel Maintainers <kernel> |
| Status: | RESOLVED CANTFIX | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | robert |
| Priority: | Normal | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| URL: | https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215375 | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
| Attachments: |
full kernel config for 5.14.15
full kernel config for 5.15.0 SMB1 NTLM backport for kernel 5.15.12 |
||
|
Description
Davyd McColl
2021-11-05 08:24:36 UTC
Created attachment 748719 [details]
full kernel config for 5.14.15
Created attachment 748722 [details]
full kernel config for 5.15.0
I'm also not sure about setting the importance for this - it's a blocker for me to use 5.15.0, but 5.15.0 (gentoo-sources) is ~amd64 and I have my older 5.14.15 still installed Does the output of this show anything in 5.15 ? findmnt --verify --verbose `findmnt --verify --verbose` reports for this mount: /mnt/mede8er-smb [ ] target exists [ ] FS options: guest,uid=daf,gid=daf,iocharset=utf8,vers=1.0,nobrl [ ] userspace options: noauto,users [ ] do not check //mede8er/mede8er source (pseudo/net) [ ] do not check //mede8er/mede8er FS type (pseudo/net) attempting `mount /mnt/mede8er-smb` returns: Retrying with upper case share name mount error(6): No such device or address Refer to the mount.cifs(8) manual page (e.g. man mount.cifs) and kernel log messages (dmesg) dmesg reports: [ 239.024504] Use of the less secure dialect vers=1.0 is not recommended unless required for access to very old servers [ 239.024505] CIFS: VFS: Use of the less secure dialect vers=1.0 is not recommended unless required for access to very old servers [ 239.024508] CIFS: Attempting to mount \\mede8er\mede8er [ 239.205576] CIFS: VFS: \\mede8er failed to connect to IPC (rc=-6) [ 239.211939] CIFS: VFS: cifs_mount failed w/return code = -6 [ 239.211971] Use of the less secure dialect vers=1.0 is not recommended unless required for access to very old servers [ 239.211972] CIFS: VFS: Use of the less secure dialect vers=1.0 is not recommended unless required for access to very old servers [ 239.211987] CIFS: Attempting to mount \\MEDE8ER\MEDE8ER [ 239.237105] CIFS: VFS: \\MEDE8ER failed to connect to IPC (rc=-6) [ 239.243201] CIFS: VFS: cifs_mount failed w/return code = -6 Update: issue remains in 5.15.1 (I'm not sure where to check for the changelog, so I thought I'd just test and I still can't connect to CIFS 1.0 shares with 5.15.1) You have no sec=<something>. Is it trying to use ntlm ? ntlm was removed in 5.15 [1] [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=76a3c92ec9e0668e4cd0e9ff1782eb68f61a179c As you've noted, I'm not setting `sec=` on the fstab line. According to `man mount.cifs` the default should be ntlmssp. I tried setting `sec=none` - which worked fine under 5.14.15 - and then rebooted to 5.15.2, where the mount still fails, with the same errors being produced as before. update: still persists in 5.15.3 Created attachment 761299 [details, diff]
SMB1 NTLM backport for kernel 5.15.12
I can't speak to this exact issue, but I needed NTLM support, so I backported the removed CIFS support into a patch that works great on 5.15.12. I've attached it to this issue, in case any future folks want this support added back into the kernel.
As upstream no longer supports this in 5.15, closing this bug. Thanks for the patch Upstream, I raised https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215375 and it appears as if someone _might_ care, so I'm waiting on a reply there - the commentary so far is that this isn't an upstream abandonment as there was confusion as to why cifs 1.0 shares stopped working after commit 18d04062f83b3eedb64e9f64ede26ee83ae7f152. I'm not sure if that should affect the status of this report. (In reply to Davyd McColl from comment #12) > Thanks for the patch > > Upstream, I raised https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215375 and it > appears as if someone _might_ care, so I'm waiting on a reply there - the > commentary so far is that this isn't an upstream abandonment as there was > confusion as to why cifs 1.0 shares stopped working after commit > 18d04062f83b3eedb64e9f64ede26ee83ae7f152. I'm not sure if that should affect > the status of this report. Excellent, we'll keep an eye on the upstream bug and look at potential backports of any changes. |
