From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 18 13:38:38 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C564A16A406; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 13:38:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 976C343D93; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 13:38:32 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org) Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1192) id 5EA1A1A4E89; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 06:38:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 06:38:32 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Xin LI Message-ID: <20060418133832.GF35896@elvis.mu.org> References: <200604180528.k3I5SfTo059921@repoman.freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200604180528.k3I5SfTo059921@repoman.freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, ps@freebsd.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, mohans@freebsd.orgc Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/nfsclient nfs_bio.c nfs_vnops.c X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 13:38:38 -0000 * Xin LI [060417 23:39] wrote: > delphij 2006-04-18 05:28:41 UTC > > FreeBSD src repository > > Modified files: (Branch: RELENG_6) > sys/nfsclient nfs_bio.c nfs_vnops.c > Log: > MFC src/sys/nfsclient/nfs_bio.c,v 1.154 > and src/sys/nfsclient/nfs_vnops.c,v 1.262 (by ps@): > ... > - Treat ETIMEDOUT as a "recoverable" error, causing the buffer > to be re-dirtied. ETIMEDOUT can occur on soft mounts, when > the number of retries are exceeded, and we don't want data loss > in that case. Actually that's the documented behavior, if the mount times out, one will lose data. What does this do? Leave the buffer dirty/held until forcefully unmounted? I guess that sort of makes sense, can someone explain a bit better? -- - Alfred Perlstein