Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 09:37:56 -0400 From: Steve Polyack <korvus@comcast.net> To: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Cc: User Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>, bseklecki@noc.cfi.pgh.pa.us Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: FreeBSD NFS client goes into infinite retry loop Message-ID: <4BA8C434.30805@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <4BA8B2CB.1090905@comcast.net> References: <4BA8B2CB.1090905@comcast.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 03/22/10 19:53, Rick Macklem wrote: > > On Mon, 22 Mar 2010, John Baldwin wrote: > > >> It looks like it also returns ESTALE when the inode is invalid (< > >> ROOTINO ||> max inodes?) - would an unlinked file in FFS referenced at > >> a later time report an invalid inode? > >> > > I'm no ufs guy, but the only way I can think of is if the file system > on the server was newfs'd with fewer i-nodes? (Unlikely, but...) > (Basically, it is safe to return ESTALE for anything that is not > a transient failure that could recover on a retry.) > > >> But back to your point, zfs_zget() seems to be failing and returning the > >> EINVAL before zfs_fhtovp() even has a chance to set and check zp_gen. > >> I'm trying to get some more details through the use of gratuitous > >> dprintf()'s, but they don't seem to be making it to any logs or the > >> console even with vfs.zfs.debug=1 set. Any pointers on how to get these > >> dprintf() calls working? > > I know diddly (as in absolutely nothing about zfs). > > > > That I have no idea on. Maybe Rick can chime in? I'm actually not sure why > > we would want to treat a FHTOVP failure as anything but an ESTALE error in the > > NFS server to be honest. > > > As far as I know, only if the underlying file system somehow has a > situation where the file handle can't be translated at that point in time, > but could be able to later. I have no idea if any file system is like that > and I don't such a file system would be an appropriate choice for an NFS > server, even if such a beast exists. (Even then, although FreeBSD's client > assumes EIO might recover on a retry, that isn't specified in any RFC, as > far as I know.) > > That's why I proposed a patch that simply translates all VFS_FHTOVP() > errors to ESTALE in the NFS server. (It seems simpler than chasing down > cases in all the underlying file systems?) > > rick, chiming in:-) > > > Makes sense to me. I'll continue to bang on NFS with your initial patch in my lab for a while. Should I open a PR for further discussion / resolution of the issue in -CURRENT / STABLE? Thanks, Steve Polyack
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4BA8C434.30805>