From: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>
To: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@primarydata.com>,
NFS list <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
open-osd <osd-dev@open-osd.org>
Subject: Re: [osd-dev] [PATCH] pnfs-obj: Proper delay for NFS4ERR_RECALLCONFLICT in layout_get_done
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 17:31:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52D55846.7090205@panasas.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52D54D87.7010100@panasas.com>
Trond hi
The subject needs to read "pnfs:" and not "pnfs-obj:"
On 01/14/2014 04:45 PM, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>
> An NFS4ERR_RECALLCONFLICT is returned by server from a GET_LAYOUT
> only when a Server Sent a RECALL do to that GET_LAYOUT, or
> the RECALL and GET_LAYOUT crossed on the wire.
> In any way this means we want to wait at most until in-flight IO
> is finished and the RECALL can be satisfied.
>
> So a proper wait here is more like 1/10 of a second, not 15 seconds
> like we have now. (We use NFS4_POLL_RETRY_MIN here)
>
> Current code totally craps out performance of very large files on
> most pnfs-objects layouts, because of how the map changes when the
> file has grown and spills into the next raid group.
>
> CC: Stable Tree <stable@kernel.org>
And please fix the email here to <stable@vger.kernel.org>
(OK I'll send a new one sorry)
Thanks
Boaz
> Signed-off-by: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>
> ---
> fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
> index d53d678..3264fca 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
> @@ -7058,7 +7058,7 @@ static void nfs4_layoutget_done(struct rpc_task *task, void *calldata)
> struct nfs4_state *state = NULL;
> unsigned long timeo, giveup;
>
> - dprintk("--> %s\n", __func__);
> + dprintk("--> %s tk_status => %d\n", __func__, task->tk_status);
>
> if (!nfs41_sequence_done(task, &lgp->res.seq_res))
> goto out;
> @@ -7067,11 +7067,27 @@ static void nfs4_layoutget_done(struct rpc_task *task, void *calldata)
> case 0:
> goto out;
> case -NFS4ERR_LAYOUTTRYLATER:
> + /* NFS4ERR_RECALLCONFLICT is always a minimal delay (conflict with
> + * self)
> + * TODO: NFS4ERR_LAYOUTTRYLATER is a conflict with another client
> + * (or clients). What we should do is randomize a short delay like on a
> + * network broadcast burst, and raise the random max every failure.
> + * For now leave it stateless and do this polling.
> + */
> case -NFS4ERR_RECALLCONFLICT:
> timeo = rpc_get_timeout(task->tk_client);
> giveup = lgp->args.timestamp + timeo;
> - if (time_after(giveup, jiffies))
> - task->tk_status = -NFS4ERR_DELAY;
> + if (time_after(giveup, jiffies)) {
> + /* Do a minimum delay, We are actually waiting for our
> + * own IO to finish (In most cases)
> + */
> + dprintk("%s: NFS4ERR_RECALLCONFLICT waiting\n",
> + __func__);
> + rpc_delay(task, NFS4_POLL_RETRY_MIN);
> + task->tk_status = 0;
> + rpc_restart_call_prepare(task);
> + goto out; /* Do not call nfs4_async_handle_error() */
> + }
> break;
> case -NFS4ERR_EXPIRED:
> case -NFS4ERR_BAD_STATEID:
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-14 15:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-14 14:45 [PATCH] pnfs-obj: Proper delay for NFS4ERR_RECALLCONFLICT in layout_get_done Boaz Harrosh
2014-01-14 14:58 ` Fwd: " Boaz Harrosh
2014-01-14 15:10 ` Boaz Harrosh
2014-01-14 15:31 ` Boaz Harrosh [this message]
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=52D55846.7090205@panasas.com \
--to=bharrosh@panasas.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=osd-dev@open-osd.org \
--cc=trond.myklebust@primarydata.com \
/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