From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 653BD3C0A0E for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2026 21:23:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791321840; cv=none; b=LLmr1e/foCfhGMpQp15vYZXCnIKBygD++KNIX38qZRssO2nHKZYj7Mca4RNelFj9QqAWk26PSkx/YdHbXmif1WV2Q6G/EsR58szAG7eS+bjd7ku5w29Aq8Nd6BZraGo+FZOl9m1UP3MBZMMYzbt/JpcmnedGX+ef8G640Qiw3io= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791321840; c=relaxed/simple; bh=z5pPBWStISMaENokrkQFhDnzSdAReUpYk74mhPd7gIE=; h=MIME-Version:Date:From:To:Cc:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: Subject:Content-Type; b=iiBy9uKrdS9YzgwVeRHhQIxBDEHb+oYkzu5YLtbbLe8WOVnv3bENaoRYgNDg4QL609h1Bv8FIsu+drX4Hz9fjO/ya5XIPlYuLKj9yg2KCNn0rP/uMfHAw59r1dxWPs8AlYmIey8Qli1buJrUE3mW+tlvTaj72a93f0ZjEraqfSI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=lerCCNgE; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="lerCCNgE" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AFF6F1F0089B; Tue, 6 Oct 2026 21:23:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1791321839; bh=lbdRhrD1QzSQSV1dSwqzJ+i12X19SvUtcVKeYZ4LK6s=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject; b=lerCCNgEnHnBHY1vfOSlCUcF7q6Y2vtwMiSytaJJwJKQyEDUnQWnZQuSoKUcaN6k2 55kkhf7Asd7myLl2/8OHTUMDqb1dF17G2tWnDc4AxhG1Vnk/TrIurpeTD/cmM7jlpo NnbTryx9WogSBR9QSCyunippOVSUKBi0ZwCmcy5uCV582hgrpvZ2/pn43HKOo64eSf Vz2WKi8tzLK7jZ8wjD5GE0mJ4I/iioOr06C6gTHssrhfRPty3ScKDrgjr5Mj9QUc2w dEuGDylbzoIgfzNHfWbuOKNpB4u6IT1zMnRgHJloTs+ah/+jkW9pGzR1KkJQoYNC8T 4W4+vEfHKDCGg== Received: from phl-compute-02.internal (phl-compute-02.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailfauth.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E249EF40068; Tue, 6 Oct 2026 17:23:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-imap-04 ([10.202.2.82]) by phl-compute-02.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 06 Oct 2026 17:23:57 -0400 X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: dmFkZTFNyJ6f9mKMnX6jb7Y6xPOiaDRd1EqORygMJpk8PxW420JCT4dd+KtZ62a6vTF6c3 6jdAMn5n3njXHhuoJpdasQCVDiIN/3OPXNMSV7be5pVxutHtE00VcHAIQtj069Q71kodUd LbQDPWKeaE2lS1q1Ay5DW5rrUXGhQBXs+OmXKS4e4e9z0p6pX6G51b6XECfXVD9S2QgR9n INlRAguu4HaEQeuoQAq4zwTqunmMHmeipqM1SAxNXOnOOENDqPjfdVl1tMW8T6ajVdNxn2 KbEg/q60MUu524TA4k0mmnSlsCOtkOITBGL6BV3rP9r7xNOio8Pczrg6886VWKEOmZdnoA lhOiZYGlSoAqq74XbvuXDpZ+6FXAHyY520497Kn30mpDdVtcivYumQicm7RTNk+G3KvenH a1Es5RWPUwLowDJV7cIZCEs760YLL8Ethx55CX2H4VbdRQX4FwBMRhBEOx0CDrGQRlvvxI RfomreUeg14XhCi9UrrWOgynT887i61lDkUxx27/j4aeeHDeCp2fO7Q0hwyZdiVEk7jtiK nlmrm2qGpZziI4+dKwlmR5PiC+UoSvxtn195PZIBvvxo+3GtHc5TUu+K1rclTb7+8ORnwO N+6uVMQMcEDj21KnDgDehRWvwxl0d+4dnRdWEIstL5FuwYz0F5msy4Zxer/g X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i20964851:Fastmail Received: by mailuser.phl.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id C186AB6006F; Tue, 6 Oct 2026 17:23:57 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-ThreadId: AQUtHn2Yp4ZR Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2026 17:23:37 -0400 From: "Anna Schumaker" To: "Manjunath Patil" , "Trond Myklebust" Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, "Chuck Lever" , "Jeff Layton" , NeilBrown , "Olga Kornievskaia" , "Dai Ngo" , "Tom Talpey" Message-Id: <6213dd5a-ec6d-46b8-962a-53f05db796ca@app.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20260819173055.1956882-1-manjunath.b.patil@oracle.com> References: <20260819173055.1956882-1-manjunath.b.patil@oracle.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] SUNRPC: add transport details to timeout diagnostics Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Manjunath, On Wed, Aug 19, 2026, at 1:30 PM, Manjunath Patil wrote: > The existing RPC timeout messages identify only the RPC program and > server name. That makes it difficult to distinguish a server-side > response stall from a transport that is disconnected, reconnecting, > or using a different connection. > > Include the RPC client id, transport id, current transport connection > cookie, and RPC task owner in the ratelimited timeout messages. These > fields provide a compact way to correlate a timeout message with > rpcctl and other transport state. > > For example, an NFS timeout reports: > > nfs: server 192.168.50.1 clid=4 xprt=1 cc=1 owner=6245 > not responding, timed out > > Assisted-by: Codex:gpt-5 > Signed-off-by: Manjunath Patil > --- > net/sunrpc/clnt.c | 20 +++++++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/sunrpc/clnt.c b/net/sunrpc/clnt.c > index efa26899bc7d..6b5e2787dc81 100644 > --- a/net/sunrpc/clnt.c > +++ b/net/sunrpc/clnt.c > @@ -2534,17 +2534,21 @@ static void > rpc_check_timeout(struct rpc_task *task) > { > struct rpc_clnt *clnt = task->tk_client; > + struct rpc_rqst *req; > + struct rpc_xprt *xprt; > > if (RPC_SIGNALLED(task)) > return; > > - if (xprt_adjust_timeout(task->tk_rqstp) == 0) > + req = task->tk_rqstp; > + if (xprt_adjust_timeout(req) == 0) > return; > + xprt = req->rq_xprt; > > trace_rpc_timeout_status(task); > task->tk_timeouts++; > > - if (RPC_IS_SOFTCONN(task) && !rpc_check_connected(task->tk_rqstp)) { > + if (RPC_IS_SOFTCONN(task) && !rpc_check_connected(req)) { > rpc_call_rpcerror(task, -ETIMEDOUT); > return; > } > @@ -2556,14 +2560,15 @@ rpc_check_timeout(struct rpc_task *task) > * connection gets terminally broken. > */ > if ((task->tk_flags & RPC_TASK_NO_RETRANS_TIMEOUT) && > - rpc_check_connected(task->tk_rqstp)) > + rpc_check_connected(req)) > return; > > if (clnt->cl_chatty) { > pr_notice_ratelimited( > - "%s: server %s not responding, timed out\n", > + "%s: server %s clid=%u xprt=%u cc=%u owner=%d not responding, > timed out\n", > clnt->cl_program->name, > - task->tk_xprt->servername); > + xprt->servername, clnt->cl_clid, xprt->id, > + READ_ONCE(xprt->connect_cookie), task->tk_owner); > } > if (task->tk_flags & RPC_TASK_TIMEOUT) > rpc_call_rpcerror(task, -ETIMEDOUT); > @@ -2576,9 +2581,10 @@ rpc_check_timeout(struct rpc_task *task) > task->tk_flags |= RPC_CALL_MAJORSEEN; > if (clnt->cl_chatty) { > pr_notice_ratelimited( > - "%s: server %s not responding, still trying\n", > + "%s: server %s clid=%u xprt=%u cc=%u owner=%d not responding, > still trying\n", More observability around this makes sense. Any reason you're adding to the notice here and not making it a new tracepoint for the extra information? I'm worried people might have tooling around watching for unresponsive servers and this might break whatever regexes they're using to look for this. Anna > clnt->cl_program->name, > - task->tk_xprt->servername); > + xprt->servername, clnt->cl_clid, xprt->id, > + READ_ONCE(xprt->connect_cookie), task->tk_owner); > } > } > rpc_force_rebind(clnt); > -- > 2.47.3