From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:45195 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1945979Ab2K2AbL (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Nov 2012 19:31:11 -0500 Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 11:30:51 +1100 From: NeilBrown To: "J. Bruce Fields" Cc: Steve Dickson , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] gssd: base the size of the fd array on the RLIMIT_NOFILE limit. Message-ID: <20121129113051.046bc658@notabene.brown> In-Reply-To: <20121128131054.GB11651@fieldses.org> References: <20121128010939.2475.13123.stgit@notabene.brown> <20121128011123.2475.13691.stgit@notabene.brown> <20121128131054.GB11651@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_//i1lZFFD=uFYlm1inq5SOXo"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --Sig_//i1lZFFD=uFYlm1inq5SOXo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 08:10:55 -0500 "J. Bruce Fields" wrote: > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:11:23PM +1100, Neil Brown wrote: > > We have previously raised the size of the 'pollarray' once (32 -> 256) > > and I have had another request to make it bigger. > > Rather than changing the hard-coded value, make it depend on > > RLIMIT_NOFILE. This is an upper limit on the size of the array > > that can be passed to poll() anyway. >=20 > Sounds like a good idea. >=20 > Just out of curiosity: how does it fail? I guess mounts just start > failing at some point--how do people find the workaround? Error seems to be rpcsec_gss: gss_init_sec_context: (major) Miscellaneous failure - (minor) C= annot contact any KDC for requested realm in rpc.gssd logs. I guess people could read the source to find the work around .... not ideal though. I guess we should get gssd to generate some more helpful message. The seem to be further problems that the customer is experiencing so I might wait until they are completely resolved to ensure I have complete understanding before I propose a further patch. NeilBrown --Sig_//i1lZFFD=uFYlm1inq5SOXo Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQIVAwUBULaswjnsnt1WYoG5AQKQ4Q/+N5cvBYAlpDbYVBP/TJES6vA7no94qDP7 s+QkHEHXuHiA9Zxx6hSsd54Y6wAaEGsiMKsBncPJ70qDS0JeA7bIkoPcI20R/XP7 FeXuz1gPoprYoLQYkqhRGwDidVuwtTg0slPapfMFeoUPbJakNkaRvebDyXyFWvIx /bBXGeR4hmYamkSblRGan/l+20NQwtle4jaseTdfKG3nhIPFHF9bBGDc6ecMKBtE R380v4xlak34cYQQYH1RMzIrD1KiwJyI+YOU47HLWPk9T9ryGVF939VXwS1Kvlu/ iSuYxeQP04XEZTPxqMktq5zgk47dc28qppQHkdh34tDFlotcXuNimaAsx+6alBe3 HWxyS/WG+ZrCheeRGLANop2ZNKTHnyQvnBAHUtImhNy9fTfw3I3qnQjbj1dPll3E GmbUVazgYY+yPyKMvy1/zY43MiX7LezZFdAAAHNO2WsnHinox80iEqvCdIGMNOax FrJPgx7wnqdGS2VwtCC2KZ9WWVf4jWc16kOGaTSp7gfQYbKv1/3X1Rg/oBijYrwJ LGw1wWu9emwo653Gh+AiRaUA5PM/ogB0Xpy/06CWQ7m1OrrqHhpBmBgkPDpWvJMr NPajZzp7gTzkwWI4ggG/riOlBRI59jnJCnjsSDCdZ8ClaVI19vdODizvYRQi1+tp Au2+7C5iXuc= =bUL9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_//i1lZFFD=uFYlm1inq5SOXo--