From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 551EE1487C1 for ; Fri, 13 Sep 2024 20:05:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726257912; cv=none; b=bZ1h0TDCbTpucHqwux2dhMhA/u1mv5X6iaeb6N4owMyCMGYZP7dmnwT3vzbQPY18vTQlA3YSezEjSNn6fV6Ea7iPO7AwQvteuE46y5fmPr/gcUlORDaG3yM1BOXG/SJOHUrS5EPvHHXgBBbp+YewQNnmKrBi895hsgIdi13VWg4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726257912; c=relaxed/simple; bh=relOxu7i0yYjnbvGV6WmZlxTBzNEizQxN8MogBXQDAc=; h=Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:From:To:Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:Subject; b=tBsYFtmFuj86s/xftrsOhL8MMZNGceCSfFwP09QQien9TvdssDfuHzUF+xgW9FgPKZQMUN42SuFnSnBOP9GmfWg7jR4XzDRtTmCd717FNDpwqDhP/6CtqxrwLWtA942/G/tye02opZh3TlvlBZGQ5mYYA58hcj/ffI9w4LIbItU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Vtcv92TR; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="Vtcv92TR" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EBEADC4CEC0; Fri, 13 Sep 2024 20:05:11 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1726257912; bh=relOxu7i0yYjnbvGV6WmZlxTBzNEizQxN8MogBXQDAc=; h=Date:From:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From; b=Vtcv92TRuhXKDaSKkK7PU4FdOb5BNuKmuxlVHKy6ZPC7wz/XiW2WVgi9cM27F417C 8eI5Wa9ajGhXsPsHH1Z90R1wdlP5/BbQblzS71/brhnKenhZE3a/POIydk96RWwBOR ubwnqOjDkweDKeBZKjVWWa39EOIfouGvVP/eXOTEo/1zX/lz6R1YyWTa0JfgXS829u 3AuaGXQewVibOQMClSZiIRIzQl3Mm+erSRMZzznCbBGACR1FvUYw+bprbzzkUkG8yD ersp4n73yUKK87W0HIupnfuHXgiQo+VZDpdt8tHWXuMqrHja7xLX2Yc2Zm5+L/ITyP N4csQiZyCZGoQ== Received: from [10.30.226.235] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by aws-us-west-2-korg-oddjob-rhel9-1.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7140A3806655; Fri, 13 Sep 2024 20:05:14 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 20:05:10 +0000 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Bugspray Bot To: trondmy@kernel.org, cel@kernel.org, jlayton@kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, anna@kernel.org Message-ID: <20240913-b218735c3-fa22f53ea4da@bugzilla.kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20240913-b218735c0-12465843fe68@bugzilla.kernel.org> References: <20240913-b218735c0-12465843fe68@bugzilla.kernel.org> Subject: Re: NFSD callback operations block everything when clients are unresponsive X-Bugzilla-Product: File System X-Bugzilla-Component: NFSD X-Mailer: bugspray 0.1-dev cel writes via Kernel.org Bugzilla: Agreed, the queue_delayed_work() isn't working the way I expected, but it may behave differently with an ordered work queue than it does with a bog standard work queue instance. In any event, some CB operations can be "fire and forget" while others will want some recourse on failure-to-send, and at least CB_OFFLOAD needs to be as reliable as we can make it. Thus having specific retry handlers for each CB operation seems like the best long-term approach. View: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=218735#c3 You can reply to this message to join the discussion. -- Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot. Kernel.org Bugzilla (bugspray 0.1-dev)