From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (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 79E2C72618 for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2026 13:37:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769780222; cv=none; b=K3S/EWiKl13rIJ1jpWbTlpNarX4EaoBUzWlgmTAIrfCx4a02aUmzHDw3PRkclo4rjY7tW5v4cT+O7EsM89oMnXvxpPXmQeNRvaEJH1vNJnjFvU8Ax4yzthAj6R3RfcgXrPfCgpKVFfuNCz8KOMfDxav8cF8nt6NG7md9TEmF1po= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769780222; c=relaxed/simple; bh=iPmy9kCaCWlCx4knb2JNLUT4RnqsAW42EhzxH1Gov8k=; h=From:In-Reply-To:References:To:Cc:Subject:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Date:Message-ID; b=S636MyXzvA/TZKnbqP0H2E45C/wnjVzyuEUMym6KEy2imfsA+V6ZBl1gLhmlIrPNsekec4IdPLkRz27uew0GJMAsc0LEgzIBQgmkSZPGTWhU9d4J5OAIXEqMASuD50sWjetmOnrODDuIDVSi+emQ5XqkBWLRtdskz3c8RjvOr+0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=c8XsWs87; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="c8XsWs87" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1769780220; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=oKpcV9V0XeSbL5KkoEEp46UmlZVVKLp4Ee8EeUbrCYc=; b=c8XsWs8765YKtgsEumfhMlkLYdN9Yf+ad35OHLHkHPUYvh4r4z5lwyHcmQNr1dyw/Y7bJd f6G0nTZ/v15sMCkQVTt7QxjfVEDsZt/h7AlFYB62dFBmXuOi7Xnv8LjCC1EmI5S8/ygufo vdE3mkSpobKNVsrA2X4jvoS5i687DME= Received: from mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-16-2dzTHYG0MC-TVEr-0POGDg-1; Fri, 30 Jan 2026 08:36:57 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 2dzTHYG0MC-TVEr-0POGDg-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: 2dzTHYG0MC-TVEr-0POGDg_1769780216 Received: from mx-prod-int-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.93]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5663A180047F; Fri, 30 Jan 2026 13:36:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from warthog.procyon.org.uk (unknown [10.44.33.164]) by mx-prod-int-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE6B11800665; Fri, 30 Jan 2026 13:36:53 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: <20260129173725.887651-4-sprasad@microsoft.com> References: <20260129173725.887651-4-sprasad@microsoft.com> <20260129173725.887651-1-sprasad@microsoft.com> To: nspmangalore@gmail.com Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, smfrench@gmail.com, pc@manguebit.org, bharathsm@microsoft.com, netfs@lists.linux.dev, Shyam Prasad N Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] cifs: make retry logic in read/write path consistent with other paths Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netfs@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <2263955.1769780212.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2026 13:36:52 +0000 Message-ID: <2263956.1769780212@warthog.procyon.org.uk> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.30.177.93 nspmangalore@gmail.com wrote: > + unsigned int retries; /* number of retries so far */ Is this redundant with netfs_io_subrequest::retry_count? (This can be changed from u8 to unsigned int if it helps). I suspect that there might be a fight over who gets to increment it, though. > + if (is_replayable_error(rc)) { > + trace_netfs_sreq(&rdata->subreq, netfs_sreq_trace_io_req_submitted); > + __set_bit(NETFS_SREQ_NEED_RETRY, &rdata->subreq.flags); You didn't see MID_RESPONSE_SUBMITTED, so I would pick a different trace value there. David