From: Chuck Lever III <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
Cc: Samasth Norway Ananda <samasth.norway.ananda@oracle.com>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com>,
Anna Schumaker <anna@kernel.org>,
Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@redhat.com>,
Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] NFSv4.1: Assign the right value for initval and retries for rpc timeout
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 18:41:45 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <75BED47C-298C-46A2-B085-3A3E8689FCE5@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <40ff24fdebb70792c7a714186f74bcd51b8c7a79.camel@kernel.org>
> On Jan 29, 2024, at 12:04 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2024-01-22 at 21:35 -0800, Samasth Norway Ananda wrote:
>> Make sure the rpc timeout was assigned with the correct value for
>> initial timeout and max number of retries.
>>
>> Fixes: 57331a59ac0d ("NFSv4.1: Use the nfs_client's rpc timeouts for backchannel")
>> Signed-off-by: Samasth Norway Ananda <samasth.norway.ananda@oracle.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@redhat.com>
>> ---
>> net/sunrpc/svc.c | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/sunrpc/svc.c b/net/sunrpc/svc.c
>> index f60c93e5a25d..b969e505c7b7 100644
>> --- a/net/sunrpc/svc.c
>> +++ b/net/sunrpc/svc.c
>> @@ -1598,10 +1598,10 @@ void svc_process_bc(struct rpc_rqst *req, struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
>> /* Finally, send the reply synchronously */
>> if (rqstp->bc_to_initval > 0) {
>> timeout.to_initval = rqstp->bc_to_initval;
>> - timeout.to_retries = rqstp->bc_to_initval;
>> + timeout.to_retries = rqstp->bc_to_retries;
>> } else {
>> timeout.to_initval = req->rq_xprt->timeout->to_initval;
>> - timeout.to_initval = req->rq_xprt->timeout->to_retries;
>> + timeout.to_retries = req->rq_xprt->timeout->to_retries;
>> }
>> memcpy(&req->rq_snd_buf, &rqstp->rq_res, sizeof(req->rq_snd_buf));
>> task = rpc_run_bc_task(req, &timeout);
>
>
> The original patch went in via Anna's tree, but this is more a server-
> side RPC patch. Who's planning to pick this one up? In any case:
>
>
> Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
I've pushed this to nfsd-fixes. I can drop it if Anna or Trond
want to take it instead.
--
Chuck Lever
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-29 18:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-23 5:35 [PATCH 1/1] NFSv4.1: Assign the right value for initval and retries for rpc timeout Samasth Norway Ananda
2024-01-23 14:04 ` Chuck Lever
2024-01-29 17:04 ` Jeff Layton
2024-01-29 18:41 ` Chuck Lever III [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=75BED47C-298C-46A2-B085-3A3E8689FCE5@oracle.com \
--to=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=anna@kernel.org \
--cc=bcodding@redhat.com \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=samasth.norway.ananda@oracle.com \
--cc=trond.myklebust@hammerspace.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).