From: Roman Kagan <Roman.Kagan@itep.ru>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [NFS] NFS rpc and stale handles on 2.6.x servers
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 14:55:36 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040130115536.GA7285@panda.itep.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <16409.43367.545322.356713@notabene.cse.unsw.edu.au>
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 10:16:05AM +0000, Neil Brown wrote:
> The "RPC request reserved 0 ..." is very odd. It does immediately
> indicate a major problem, but it should be fixed, if only I could
> figure out what was causing it.
In case it helps: having enabled svcsock debugging by
echo $[0x0100] > /proc/sys/sunrpc/rpc_debug
I've noticed that those messages always appear in the same pattern:
svc: server c7a3d200 waiting for data (to = 3600000)
svc: socket c6dbfb00(inet c769f220), write_space busy=0
svc: socket c2a9fac0 TCP data ready (svsk c6dbf980)
svc: socket c2a9fac0 served by daemon c7a3d200
svc: socket c2a9fac0 TCP data ready (svsk c6dbf980)
svc: socket c2a9fac0 busy, not enqueued
svc: server c7a3d200, socket c6dbf980, inuse=1
svc: tcp_recv c6dbf980 data 1 conn 0 close 0
svc: socket c6dbf980 recvfrom(c6dbf9d8, 0) = 4
svc: TCP record, 2584 bytes
svc: socket c6dbf980 recvfrom(c6d06a18, 1512) = 2584
svc: TCP complete record (2584 bytes)
svc: socket c2a9fac0 served by daemon c6efe000
svc: got len=2584
svc: socket c2a9fac0 busy, not enqueued
svc: socket c6dbf980 sendto([c436b000 140... ], 140) = 140 (addr 43e17cc1)
svc: socket c2a9fac0 busy, not enqueued
svc: server c7a3d200 waiting for data (to = 3600000)
svc: server c7a3d200, socket c25007a0, inuse=1
svc: tcp_recv c25007a0 data 0 conn 0 close 1
svc: svc_delete_socket(c25007a0)
svc: server socket destroy delayed
svc: got len=0
RPC request reserved 0 but used 140
svc: releasing dead socket
svc: server c7a3d200 waiting for data (to = 3600000)
Note that "tcp_recv" with this set of parameters (data=0 conn=0 close=1)
is always correlated with "RPC request reserved ...", and also the
"used" request length matches the message length in "sendto" on the
seemingly unrelated socket.
Unfortunately I don't understand the code well enough to make a better
bug report, but feel free to ask me to test your patches if you can't
reproduce the problem in your setup.
Roman.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-30 11:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <4014675D.2040405@hanaden.com>
2004-01-30 0:46 ` [NFS] NFS rpc and stale handles on 2.6.x servers Neil Brown
2004-01-30 1:25 ` Mike Fedyk
2004-01-30 1:36 ` Neil Brown
2004-01-30 2:11 ` hanasaki
2004-01-30 11:55 ` Roman Kagan [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=20040130115536.GA7285@panda.itep.ru \
--to=roman.kagan@itep.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au \
/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