From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Thu Jul 2 11:59:35 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E204F9927A8 for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2015 11:59:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rmacklem@uoguelph.ca) Received: from esa-annu.net.uoguelph.ca (esa-annu.mail.uoguelph.ca [131.104.91.36]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6853C293B; Thu, 2 Jul 2015 11:59:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rmacklem@uoguelph.ca) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A2BdAwBpJ5VV/61jaINbhEUGvS0Jh2YCggMUAQEBAQEBAYEKhCMBAQQjVhACAQgYAgINGQICVwIEE4gvtWaWYgEBAQEBBQEBAQEBARyBIYophFI0B4JogUMFlBKHOoVmhBSPHoNbAiaEFiIxgUaBAgEBAQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,392,1432612800"; d="scan'208";a="223431747" Received: from nipigon.cs.uoguelph.ca (HELO zcs1.mail.uoguelph.ca) ([131.104.99.173]) by esa-annu.net.uoguelph.ca with ESMTP; 02 Jul 2015 07:59:22 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zcs1.mail.uoguelph.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ABC215F533; Thu, 2 Jul 2015 07:59:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from zcs1.mail.uoguelph.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zcs1.mail.uoguelph.ca [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id q2wlW5nL1-DM; Thu, 2 Jul 2015 07:59:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zcs1.mail.uoguelph.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id C756A15F54D; Thu, 2 Jul 2015 07:59:20 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zcs1.mail.uoguelph.ca Received: from zcs1.mail.uoguelph.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zcs1.mail.uoguelph.ca [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id cwXRXiEGw5T7; Thu, 2 Jul 2015 07:59:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from zcs1.mail.uoguelph.ca (zcs1.mail.uoguelph.ca [172.17.95.18]) by zcs1.mail.uoguelph.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA92C15F533; Thu, 2 Jul 2015 07:59:20 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2015 07:59:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Rick Macklem To: Julian Elischer Cc: d@delphij.net, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Message-ID: <1022558302.2863702.1435838360534.JavaMail.zimbra@uoguelph.ca> In-Reply-To: <5594B008.10202@freebsd.org> References: <684628776.2772174.1435793776748.JavaMail.zimbra@uoguelph.ca> <55947C6E.5060409@delphij.net> <1491630362.2785531.1435799383802.JavaMail.zimbra@uoguelph.ca> <5594B008.10202@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Linux NFSv4 clients are getting (bad sequence-id error!) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [172.17.95.10] X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.0.9_GA_6191 (ZimbraWebClient - FF34 (Win)/8.0.9_GA_6191) Thread-Topic: Linux NFSv4 clients are getting (bad sequence-id error!) Thread-Index: vseI9Trq0D3X255JHmasf5P3utEJKw== X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2015 11:59:36 -0000 Julian Elischer wrote: > On 7/2/15 9:09 AM, Rick Macklem wrote: > > I am going to post to nfsv4@ietf.org to see what they say. Please > > let me know if Xin Li's patch resolves your problem, even though I > > don't believe it is correct except for the UINT32_MAX case. Good > > luck with it, rick > and please keep us all in the loop as to what they say! > > the general N+2 bit sounds like bullshit to me.. its always N+1 in a > number field that has a > bit of slack at wrap time (probably due to some ambiguity in the > original spec). > Actually, since N is the lock op already done, N + 1 is the next lock operation in order. Since lock ops need to be strictly ordered, allowing N + 2 (which means N + 2 would be done before N + 1) makes no sense. I think the author of the RFC meant that N + 2 or greater fails, but it was poorly worded. I will pass along whatever I get from nfsv4@ietf.org. (There is an archive of it somewhere, but I can't remember where.;-) rick