From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: "Ionut Nechita (Wind River)" <ionut.nechita@windriver.com>
Cc: idryomov@gmail.com, amarkuze@redhat.com,
ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, clrkwllms@kernel.org,
ionut_n2001@yahoo.com, jkosina@suse.com, jlayton@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev,
rostedt@goodmis.org, sage@newdream.net, slava@dubeyko.com,
superm1@kernel.org, xiubli@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libceph: handle EADDRNOTAVAIL more gracefully
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2026 08:33:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260211073317.M73faj98@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260210071929.15602-1-ionut.nechita@windriver.com>
On 2026-02-10 09:19:29 [+0200], Ionut Nechita (Wind River) wrote:
> You're absolutely right that if the address became valid in 1-2s, the
> third or fourth attempt would succeed. The problem is that in our
> environment, EADDRNOTAVAIL does NOT resolve in 1-2 seconds. That was
> an incorrect generalization from simple DAD scenarios.
>
> From the production dmesg (6.12.0-1-rt-amd64, StarlingX on Dell
> PowerEdge R720, IPv6-only Ceph cluster), the EADDRNOTAVAIL condition
> persists for much longer:
>
> 13:20:52 - mon0 session lost, hunting begins, first error -99
> 13:57:03 - mon0 session finally re-established
My question again, is this specific to PREEMPT_RT or would also happen
in a !PREEMPT_RT setup?
Sebastian
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-11 7:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-08 16:40 [PATCH] libceph: handle EADDRNOTAVAIL more gracefully Ionut Nechita (Wind River)
2026-02-09 11:03 ` Ilya Dryomov
2026-02-10 7:19 ` Ionut Nechita (Wind River)
2026-02-10 12:25 ` Ilya Dryomov
2026-02-11 7:33 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [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=20260211073317.M73faj98@linutronix.de \
--to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=amarkuze@redhat.com \
--cc=ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
--cc=idryomov@gmail.com \
--cc=ionut.nechita@windriver.com \
--cc=ionut_n2001@yahoo.com \
--cc=jkosina@suse.com \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sage@newdream.net \
--cc=slava@dubeyko.com \
--cc=superm1@kernel.org \
--cc=xiubli@redhat.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