From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 03:08:26 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DD47DC6; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 03:08:26 +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 B8570E41; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 03:08:25 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AqAEAKWlHVGDaFvO/2dsb2JhbABEhkm6MXOCHwEBAQQBAQEgBCcgCxsYAgINGQIpAQkmBggHBAEcBIdxDKpdkjeBI4wnDYMagRMDiGaLC4IzgR2PNoMlT34HFx4 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,669,1355115600"; d="scan'208";a="14198053" Received: from erie.cs.uoguelph.ca (HELO zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca) ([131.104.91.206]) by esa-annu.net.uoguelph.ca with ESMTP; 14 Feb 2013 22:08:24 -0500 Received: from zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF9C7B4165; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 22:08:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 22:08:24 -0500 (EST) From: Rick Macklem To: "Marc G. Fournier" Message-ID: <283687726.3041739.1360897704971.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> In-Reply-To: <7614F404-CD69-479E-BDFA-31451DB9040F@hub.org> Subject: Re: 9-STABLE -> NFS -> NetAPP: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Originating-IP: [172.17.91.201] X-Mailer: Zimbra 6.0.10_GA_2692 (ZimbraWebClient - FF3.0 (Win)/6.0.10_GA_2692) Cc: Konstantin Belousov , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Kostik Belousov , John Baldwin X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 03:08:26 -0000 Marc Fournier wrote: > On 2013-02-14, at 16:24 , Rick Macklem wrote: >=20 > > Marc Fournier wrote: > >> On 2013-02-14, at 08:41 , Rick Macklem > >> wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> Btw Marc, if you just want this problem to go away, I suspect > >>> getting rid > >>> of the "intr" mount option would do that. > >> > >> Am more interested in fixing the problem (if possible) then just > >> masking it, but ... > >> > >> Based on the man page for mount_nfs, wouldn't that have the > >> opposite > >> effect: > >> > >> intr Make the mount interruptible, which implies that file > >> system calls that are delayed due to an unresponsive > >> server will fail with EINTR when a termination signal is > >> posted for the process. > >> > >> I may be mis-reading, but from the above it sounds like a -9 > >> *should* > >> terminate the process if intr is enabled, while with it disabled, > >> it > >> would ignore it =E2=80=A6 ? > >> > > Yes, you have misread it (or english is a wonderfully ambiguous > > thing, > > if you prefer;-). > > > > For hard mounts (which is what you get if you don't specify either > > "soft" > > nor "intr"), the RPCs behave like other I/O subsystems, which means > > they > > do non-interruptible sleeps ("D" stat in ps) waiting for server > > replies > > and continue to try and complete the RPC "forever". You can't kill > > off > > the process/thread with any signal. > > > > If "umount -f" of the filesystem works, that terminates the > > thread(s). > > Unfortunately, "umount -f" is quite broken again. I have an idea on > > how to resolve this, but I haven't coded it yet. (The problem is > > that > > the process doing "umount -f" gets stuck before it does the > > VFS_UNMOUNT(), > > so the NFS client doesn't see it.) >=20 > For how infrequently this problem generally manifests itself, is there > an overall benefit from a debugging standpoint of my leaving intr on > and reporting when it happens, including procstat output, and then > upgrading to latest kernel =E2=80=A6 ? >=20 > Its an annoyance, but it isn't like it happens daily, so I don't mind > going through the process *towards* having it fixed if there is an > overall benefit =E2=80=A6 >=20 Well, hopefully kib and/or jhb can make some progress w.r.t. this. I'll let them weigh in on what to do next, rick >=20 > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"