From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Chuck Lever <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: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 08:09:56 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101021080956.65691ec0@barsoom.rdu.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101021115622.4766887b@notabene>
On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 11:56:22 +1100
Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de> wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 08:29:38 +1100
> Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 10:29:05 -0400
> > Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@ORACLE.COM> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Oct 20, 2010, at 3:17 AM, Neil Brown wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > If I don't have any network configured (except loop-back), and try an NFSv3
> > > > mount, then it fails quickly:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ....
> > > > mount.nfs: portmap query failed: RPC: Remote system error - Network is unreachable
> > > > mount.nfs: Network is unreachable
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > If I try the same thing with a NFSv4 mount, it times out before it fails,
> > > > making a much longer delay.
> > > >
> > > > This is because mount.nfs doesn't do a portmap lookup but just leaves
> > > > everything to the kernel.
> > > > The kernel does an 'rpc_ping()' which sets RPC_TASK_SOFTCONN.
> > > > So at least it doesn't retry after the timeout. But given that we have a
> > > > clear error, we shouldn't timeout at all.
> > > >
> > > > Unfortunately I cannot see an easy way to fix this.
> > > >
> > > > The place where ENETUNREACH is in xs_tcp_setup_socket. The comment there
> > > > says "Retry with the same socket after a delay". The "delay" bit is correct,
> > > > the "retry" isn't.
> > > >
> > > > It would seem that we should just add a 'goto out' there if RPC_TASK_SOFTCONN
> > > > was set. However we cannot see the task at this point - in fact it seems
> > > > that there could be a queue of tasks waiting on this connection. I guess
> > > > some could be soft, and some not. ???
> > > >
> > > > So: An suggestions how to get a ENETUNREACH (or ECONNREFUSED or similar) to
> > > > fail immediately when RPC_TASK_SOFTCONN is set ???
> > >
> > > ECONNREFUSED should already fail immediately in this case. If it's not failing immediately, that's a bug.
> > >
> > > I agree that ENETUNREACH seems appropriate for quick failure if RPC_TASK_SOFTCONN is set. (I thought it already worked this way, but maybe I'm mistaken).
> >
> > There is certainly code that seems to treat ENETUNREACH differently if
> > RPC_TASK_SOFTCONN is set, but it doesn't seem to apply in the particular case
> > I am testing.
> > e.g. call_bind_status handles ENETUNREACH as a retry if not SOFTCONN and as a
> > failure in the SOFTCONN case.
> > I guess NFSv4 doesn't hit this because the port is explicitly set to 2049 so
> > it never does the rpcbind step.
> > So maybe we need to handle ENETUNREACH in call_connect_status as well as
> > call_bind_status ??
> >
> > Maybe something like that ... The placement of rpc_delay seems a little of
> > to me, but follows call_bind_status, so it could be correct.
> >
>
> I did a bit of testing of the patch that I sent and it isn't quite write -
> the ENETUNREACH doesn't propagate all the way up to call_connect_status.
> This patch fixes that.
>
> With it, the rpc_ping fails nicely, but when a reconnect is tried on an
> already-mounted filesystem it doesn't fail but rather retries every 5 seconds.
> This is what I wanted to happen.
>
> However I'm not at all sure that "5 seconds" is correct. I copied it from
> call_bind_status, but it seems a bit short. Maybe the number in
> call_bind_status is a bit low???
>
> Here is my current patch - which is more a starting point for discussion than
> a concrete proposal.
>
> Thanks,
> NeilBrown
>
> diff --git a/net/sunrpc/clnt.c b/net/sunrpc/clnt.c
> index fa55490..539885e 100644
> --- a/net/sunrpc/clnt.c
> +++ b/net/sunrpc/clnt.c
> @@ -1245,6 +1245,12 @@ call_connect_status(struct rpc_task *task)
> }
>
> switch (status) {
> + case -ENETUNREACH:
> + case -ECONNRESET:
> + case -ECONNREFUSED:
> + if (!RPC_IS_SOFTCONN(task))
> + rpc_delay(task, 5*HZ);
> + /* fall through */
Maybe instead of the above, we should do something like:
if (RPC_IS_SOFTCONN(task)) {
rpc_exit(task, status);
return;
}
...IOW, if this is a SOFTCONN task, return connect errors immediately.
If it's not a SOFTCONN task, treat it as we would a timeout?
That'll would probably fix the -ENETUNREACH case, but I'm not sure what
to do about the cases that rely on xs_error_report. It seems a little
suspicious that those errors all get turned into -EAGAIN.
> /* if soft mounted, test if we've timed out */
> case -ETIMEDOUT:
> task->tk_action = call_timeout;
> diff --git a/net/sunrpc/xprt.c b/net/sunrpc/xprt.c
> index 970fb00..27673d9 100644
> --- a/net/sunrpc/xprt.c
> +++ b/net/sunrpc/xprt.c
> @@ -733,6 +733,10 @@ static void xprt_connect_status(struct rpc_task *task)
> }
>
> switch (task->tk_status) {
> + case -ENETUNREACH:
> + case -ECONNREFUSED:
> + case -ECONNRESET:
> + break;
> case -EAGAIN:
> dprintk("RPC: %5u xprt_connect_status: retrying\n", task->tk_pid);
> break;
> diff --git a/net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c b/net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c
> index fe9306b..0743994 100644
> --- a/net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c
> +++ b/net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c
> @@ -1906,7 +1906,8 @@ static void xs_tcp_setup_socket(struct rpc_xprt *xprt,
> case -ECONNREFUSED:
> case -ECONNRESET:
> case -ENETUNREACH:
> - /* retry with existing socket, after a delay */
> + /* allow upper layers to choose between failure and retry */
> + goto out;
> case 0:
> case -EINPROGRESS:
> case -EALREADY:
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-21 12:10 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 [this message]
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
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=20101021080956.65691ec0@barsoom.rdu.redhat.com \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).