All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Simo Sorce <simo@redhat.com>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: should we change how the kernel detects whether gssproxy is running?
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2013 15:52:00 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1388523120.26102.9.camel@willson.li.ssimo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131231180123.GA12875@fieldses.org>

On Tue, 2013-12-31 at 13:01 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 07:33:00AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > I'm a bit concerned with how /proc/net/rpc/use-gss-proxy works...
> > 
> > For one thing, when the kernel first boots any read against that file
> > hangs. That's going to be extremely problematic for certain tools that
> > scrape info out of /proc for troubleshooting purposes (e.g. Red Hat's
> > sosreport tool).
> 
> Is that the only file under /proc for which that's true?  (E.g. the rpc
> cache channel files probably do the same, don't they?)  I was assuming
> tools like sosreport need to work from lists of specific paths.
> 
> > Also, it seems like if gssproxy suddenly dies, then this switch stays
> > stuck in its position. There is no way switch back after enabling
> > gssproxy.
> 
> That's true.  I didn't think the ability to change on the fly was
> necessary (but I'll admit it's annoying when debugging at least.)
> 
> > All of that seems unnecessarily complicated. Is there some rationale
> > for it that I'm missing?
> > 
> > Would it instead make more sense to instead just have gssproxy
> > hold a file open under /proc? If the file is being held open, then
> > send upcalls to gssproxy. If not then use the legacy code.
> 
> The kernel code needs to know which way to handle an incoming packet at
> the time it arrives.  If it falls back on the legacy upcall that means
> failing large init_sec_context calls.  So a delayed gss-proxy start (or
> a crash and restart) would mean clients erroring out (with fatal errors
> I think, not just something that would be retried).

Well if gss-proxy is not running it will fail anyway right ?
We have 90s before nfsd starts receiving incoming calls at startup
right ? Isn't that enough to guarantee whatever the admin configured to
start is started ? If gss-proxy is dead for whatever reason a failure
will happen anyway now, esp because rpc.gssd will most probably not be
running anyway if the admin configured gss-proxy instead ...

Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York


  reply	other threads:[~2013-12-31 20:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-12-31 12:33 should we change how the kernel detects whether gssproxy is running? Jeff Layton
2013-12-31 18:01 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-12-31 20:52   ` Simo Sorce [this message]
2014-01-02 18:52     ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-12-31 22:56   ` NeilBrown
2013-12-31 23:02     ` Jeff Layton
2014-01-02 18:55     ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-01-01 12:21   ` Jeff Layton

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1388523120.26102.9.camel@willson.li.ssimo.org \
    --to=simo@redhat.com \
    --cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=jlayton@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.