From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: chuck.lever@oracle.com,
Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: NFSv4 mounts take longer the fail from ENETUNREACH than NFSv3 mounts.
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 20:45:32 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101020204532.2019eb93@corrin.poochiereds.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101021074028.44bca336@notabene>
On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 07:40:28 +1100
Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de> wrote:
> >
> > Then what happens is that xs_tcp_send_request gets called again to try
> > to resend the packet. In the EHOSTUNREACH case, that returns
> > EHOSTUNREACH which eventually causes an rpc_exit with that error. In
> > the ENETUNREACH case that returns EPIPE, which makes the state machine
> > move next to call_bind and the whole thing starts over again.
>
> This confuses me. Why would xs_tcp_send_request (aka ->send_request) get
> called before the connect has succeeded? Can you make sense of that?
>
It confuses me too. I suspect that this may actually be a bug...
So EINPROGRESS makes the connect_worker task clear the connecting bit
and return. Eventually, the EHOSTUNREACH error is reported to
xs_error_report. That function does this:
xprt_wake_pending_tasks(xprt, -EAGAIN);
The task that was waiting on the connect_worker is then woken up.
call_connect_status does this:
if (status >= 0 || status == -EAGAIN) {
clnt->cl_stats->netreconn++;
task->tk_action = call_transmit;
return;
}
...and we end up in call_transmit without the socket being connected.
So I understand how this happened, but I don't really understand the
design of the connect mechanism well enough to know whether this is
by design or not.
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-21 0:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-20 7:17 NFSv4 mounts take longer the fail from ENETUNREACH than NFSv3 mounts Neil Brown
2010-10-20 14:29 ` Chuck Lever
2010-10-20 21:29 ` Neil Brown
2010-10-21 0:56 ` Neil Brown
2010-10-21 12:09 ` Jeff Layton
2010-10-21 13:52 ` Chuck Lever
2010-10-21 14:10 ` Chuck Lever
2010-10-20 17:55 ` Jeff Layton
2010-10-20 19:16 ` Jeff Layton
2010-10-20 20:40 ` Neil Brown
2010-10-21 0:45 ` Jeff Layton [this message]
2010-10-21 3:25 ` Neil Brown
2010-10-21 14:05 ` Trond Myklebust
2010-10-21 14:31 ` Chuck Lever
2010-10-21 14:42 ` Trond Myklebust
2010-10-21 19:40 ` Jeff Layton
2010-10-21 19:47 ` Trond Myklebust
2010-10-21 20:08 ` Jeff Layton
2010-10-21 20:18 ` Trond Myklebust
2011-03-23 6:41 ` NeilBrown
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=20101020204532.2019eb93@corrin.poochiereds.net \
--to=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
/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.