From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sun Apr 11 22:49:58 2021 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60D365E1C83 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 22:49:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rmacklem@uoguelph.ca) Received: from CAN01-QB1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr660077.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.66.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail.protection.outlook.com", Issuer "DigiCert Cloud Services CA-1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FJRs10Wkjz4jVm; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 22:49:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rmacklem@uoguelph.ca) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=FlZzrkNKt+7iVePJuv3TVDR8QhXXGdx9jWjI5/lq4jo+mDOVwEM8yKaWf+w4+132B5XSmuDBFHHwBoBEUSWor3uoZdtKeFMRGOTz1mrEbAyNpH3yJQKVpvdsTtw5eRik7LnrdEWZZb9bPESQCyeyXi/1MO1VzhARFjdFADQo7AGswLsKkC3PrUTy28ExoCVQAgULVlo4RLfI61GSMQ27nEAowqSG9dxNKUiMsOUfrQkVTvkxf4dK5ZZDa3nkLnrT8ijPsQtIoWFPPMZ5DbI5tEtAvbpfJtzRgf2MCeM8o3P7wr+DENNEl7SulTybom4hvRhdGF67urQ/tYabsZsiJw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=m3bpkanz4OGJKlMhEh+MMQ7BDlFG99aMJ8lL3frFn0U=; b=KRL2HizkkuJiT7MGAC96GgvQ1HZ13O9ZqxSCPTi5EhgksZSEfRVy1/H/t5PLhMaMTqmI2YKBt3jT5vU/9RX0NW7GMpKsLL54tHH3ZHP5jAQNU/NiJ38rL8XsQjAgY84OGWdMUjyNZjdsJS+OCxK3n0Vhj/AyzlABA732+C/RsXyjjeeJxGhMyOHJz1ZId6SANk+LEcg9rIxnaMkoJJC4FVDIQJA94gItwnJL+xq35O0jC1iQG2rZq4mZnjdTLRumumzIdOK7bLDB96TKCe18470ELC62jZx/J43Zpe6Lq9t79UeMHd8jN8QPoyDRnWRhYPO1WqdVnck9GpEJUeExcg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=uoguelph.ca; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=uoguelph.ca; dkim=pass header.d=uoguelph.ca; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=uoguelph.ca; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=m3bpkanz4OGJKlMhEh+MMQ7BDlFG99aMJ8lL3frFn0U=; b=ijkXjXjgJpsc0vCy+9wqnL2fjBdTzcU3OK2wX0uiIDNtrFfAfFS15UGUYbXXpsFy+zUv9SMvxMobH9Hg+IfRQvFKv82XO9mnRbjRgPRdFlxlcEZ4z85S8QmAQ6MKB1WvvxOQ8aeLwxh40Sy4dth6N2saxcRvQ743ArL10AFRXExzqW9jLUEpFfW1PvIE+W8bdQ2ne/V5GGi//B5B2rvww56iiHtNn8JzXjUJxCg9O2SmSV5m5LEkXlrVNCOWQqGUvZsT4d+TtxkvmkzRWH71Ixn9jpQshzWSFvWvTiZEVRUE9cS9FcBb+7xvTxjLlpc0epNZlYPGXKYF4z0gJbyQGA== Received: from YQXPR0101MB0968.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10b6:c00:19::29) by YQXPR01MB4658.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10b6:c01:1d::24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4020.22; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 22:49:55 +0000 Received: from YQXPR0101MB0968.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::1c05:585a:132a:f08e]) by YQXPR0101MB0968.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::1c05:585a:132a:f08e%4]) with mapi id 15.20.3999.037; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 22:49:49 +0000 From: Rick Macklem To: "Scheffenegger, Richard" , "tuexen@freebsd.org" CC: Youssef GHORBAL , "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: NFS Mount Hangs Thread-Topic: NFS Mount Hangs Thread-Index: AQHXG1G2D7AHBwtmAkS1jBAqNNo2I6qMDIgAgALy8kyACNDugIAAsfOAgAfoFLeAARWpAIAAUOsEgAKJ2oCAADW73YAAG5EAgAA+DUKAAB1JAIAACEqkgAEOcgCAAI4UZoAAhYMAgAXXgNmAAJVDAIAAMi2AgAAnewCAAAnWO4AAD/IAgABa2UGAAPlQgIAASeSAgABiy68= Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2021 22:49:49 +0000 Message-ID: References: <3750001D-3F1C-4D9A-A9D9-98BCA6CA65A4@tildenparkcapital.com> <33693DE3-7FF8-4FAB-9A75-75576B88A566@tildenparkcapital.com> <8E745920-1092-4312-B251-B49D11FE8028@pasteur.fr> <765CE1CD-6AAB-4BEF-97C6-C2A1F0FF4AC5@freebsd.org> <2B189169-C0C9-4DE6-A01A-BE916F10BABA@freebsd.org> <077ECE2B-A84C-440D-AAAB-00293C841F14@freebsd.org> <3980F368-098D-4EE4-B213-4113C2CAFE7D@freebsd.org> , <23F49FD9-A8B6-460F-9CD2-BBC3181A058F@freebsd.org>, In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 5a7a6130-cc94-44f7-9f3a-08d8fd3c1cac x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: YQXPR01MB4658: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:2201; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 4LJa8P7+owSIY2Fn7SEU6DxbQoEeN0LvLaT9KJGDR9y3f0+CjHbS7Z7hQbrtooku4Nc9Vaej9g63xPH36NRVsiS6b3Ji0cHSfZOxpypX8FkOg8G/H57Vcyh4NmygBuL1CNR87ezaouxJYNuVA7ta0npq2nZO3KrreEyqb1PaghJPIsUZ0JE5I8k82COfvxqWeZGXyJicDDECLG5sDPKWrJukQDIOrTmWV6TGE4JOKjxICrnuOEQX9uYlPnbogJsN+e1lGLsTaEhkDY8ZeM9XTPd6PDQBu4CiEraw98cosLUHoQDwk5v9J/s10s/ASfOByw4OigQg5qWYhGraG4saQjr3vdgpBgJXMUwK5PWpONYRcDnOByn3m7PUhTJv2fLqTnsvKlGPeC2TUrAEcz2zv4FfowKhrsKMQimU13a3dVdpFiccFBf6ria+lJVl0TsGEnqdmaX3bzBKIh4JL5khCAvjj3zcp2PCc6EyNNTm0TchZV0azvgMO0J04E60aVDdyTdoKlJt1nfaSAGchfIWOs5pWcEob8Nai5iXx4idT4v4tLFRlbsMr3K1iqjNEv0YMh/y7UV/eloEQ3KrLmv/TgAmfp3Aldy11wNYlWZBrrpYu1K2wg5MyKfQWHnuYwyTw/yxbFHCWRD6PT//E1azuCu685ITo/8bC8GSlkjOLomQNUIDCuIL7L8NxL4V1/gx x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:YQXPR0101MB0968.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(366004)(396003)(39850400004)(376002)(136003)(346002)(91956017)(66446008)(64756008)(54906003)(8676002)(316002)(66476007)(786003)(66556008)(83380400001)(71200400001)(6506007)(186003)(52536014)(53546011)(86362001)(8936002)(55016002)(33656002)(7696005)(2906002)(110136005)(38100700002)(9686003)(5660300002)(7116003)(4326008)(66946007)(84040400003)(966005)(3480700007)(478600001)(76116006); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: =?Windows-1252?Q?yN1dCxOIHCJZVBcy48xIZW7doy4Fo6hwPPbJywNJgKrEG9fLtl4NPzef?= =?Windows-1252?Q?PkvXhN1gW5hl6NaWejrvMDby9t0cKxtwUmJ8/TUdHV57FdhZisX7DSHk?= =?Windows-1252?Q?WYEzpIDcy2hK9ffjDAbPFzFo5xI4GAFmLYq+OVP5wKqqAlHIYcdymHg1?= =?Windows-1252?Q?PwLQrvHzMymOj8EzVsMjGeWtJUtHu4CPtDnUxeEt6FwLbNJegroYmiqm?= =?Windows-1252?Q?H17SaLRjsFkHPKA8a3UIsk3JIVm6+VSWbO5CXqeQlLLQH5u7r0UdT6Wu?= =?Windows-1252?Q?OlkRJhymESYqaoxEiFBGFurt/JM0+WuG90GiO1g+uB8kRz4ASNj2RQdQ?= =?Windows-1252?Q?bwYw3EhfIVyQSk8JAgp0s96xjmdeiKto9K/jMcSv9fSnC6j8KZis0+jc?= =?Windows-1252?Q?JahGzomhmsYExbHnhR0xEKhF2k99dMOVf/c368c0CfI0j9iPqg5Pp4iK?= =?Windows-1252?Q?clv4Peh98obIWXNlw9AfwnVQrBZMoI5Akk1TY2IDdHnOTGbrY2VYFFIJ?= =?Windows-1252?Q?yps1XFYRoGajt2/dP+KTIaa5QBuWCc4dRgr01IzdAV549NBWnAEAUbKK?= =?Windows-1252?Q?EKcxPRBMLyjjqBbqdJ09qPjXsjyVyUlw6oBNpB45NOqQqj24Xa80ZXvl?= =?Windows-1252?Q?kuZJGCgL9/vzGfV12PIkofaO6dUcv3huj496K796m8M/pZoMO+JVHWoK?= =?Windows-1252?Q?0cRUgBrYlRqWfsMCskHGYtIQINq9SzGiSgTZYzY7s2gDep/Z4tl9KG7f?= =?Windows-1252?Q?XJ3qKlb+a3nexp3SdH/CEilZCpBEZex7csEgWzivqbVHLrZUsI7Uxflm?= =?Windows-1252?Q?lV2vwYN6/oByzPsgMBORjyH9snK7MLsvB6cqadT4JcWCEr5xXB3jVG8X?= =?Windows-1252?Q?pEFlearfaZEXS8mHbOAt9Wjw+IBiuXhWReYhjfjhUTOR26+dTQuGlLt6?= =?Windows-1252?Q?5hVbyMs8bh2bRLlp+G2JyK7++1usRt5eFDdZDWPWkZ+346fGxAYebeHI?= =?Windows-1252?Q?ppjLkXjQO5DfggsfUyC/bLyEvlFF3FM5bI1IIh4E17GanwfsSYERX7+a?= =?Windows-1252?Q?df+rCVM47hEBaM83Lqa+7tF6kXEzwMobFRGfSnk+2ZTvGRN7abs6t/ep?= =?Windows-1252?Q?plEElhR0yvVl2UXFNfr0yGlBVIJm1M2nIu9NrP8k1MZ3PPeciTJnNEFn?= =?Windows-1252?Q?02xziHiEri1HktMwuMQBGp0WsGmMf6T5T4mTYBMlNLovkDsJUubO3W1Q?= =?Windows-1252?Q?6T/B3MDxqxF1HQWL2cXTM8DTMt82Zbb+wzxFz8I5O1lYC5IKxp7ncMyi?= =?Windows-1252?Q?l4vX7NU/2CgTj7i3H6c8B/Q5984LKhO64MsS/vdPdjsgOsioKEJtvFGV?= =?Windows-1252?Q?6OSbeHWy1paLcAqo+mtBktox5Rufv7dG56/6ws2DI/oaDNBs2jApkXPo?= =?Windows-1252?Q?FTC2+cN/Jz8+f9JNlFmau+vWU1V5xGtrT7xQm/AiFCg=3D?= x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: uoguelph.ca X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: YQXPR0101MB0968.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 5a7a6130-cc94-44f7-9f3a-08d8fd3c1cac X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 11 Apr 2021 22:49:49.2965 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: be62a12b-2cad-49a1-a5fa-85f4f3156a7d X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: qQhO4V8GuItPY5ZVeZ2ZQyNIuYvCgMDdoyFS88jrn1ZRdrO5f1V6keM5MWpAoaGVq8EnUKD2IT0oJLNqzxhNUw== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: YQXPR01MB4658 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4FJRs10Wkjz4jVm X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=uoguelph.ca header.s=selector1 header.b=ijkXjXjg; arc=pass (microsoft.com:s=arcselector9901:i=1); dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=uoguelph.ca; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of rmacklem@uoguelph.ca designates 40.107.66.77 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=rmacklem@uoguelph.ca X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; TO_DN_EQ_ADDR_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:40.107.0.0/16]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[uoguelph.ca:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[uoguelph.ca,none]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-1.000]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; RBL_DBL_DONT_QUERY_IPS(0.00)[40.107.66.77:from]; ARC_ALLOW(-1.00)[microsoft.com:s=arcselector9901:i=1]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:8075, ipnet:40.104.0.0/14, country:US]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[uoguelph.ca:s=selector1]; FREEFALL_USER(0.00)[rmacklem]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; SPAMHAUS_ZRD(0.00)[40.107.66.77:from:127.0.2.255]; DWL_DNSWL_LOW(-1.00)[uoguelph.ca:dkim]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(1.00)[1.000]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[40.107.66.77:from]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_POSSIBLE(0.00)[40.107.66.77:from]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-net] X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2021 22:49:58 -0000 I should be able to test D69290 in about a week. Note that I will not be able to tell if it fixes otis@'s hung Linux client problem. rick ________________________________________ From: Scheffenegger, Richard Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2021 12:54 PM To: tuexen@freebsd.org; Rick Macklem Cc: Youssef GHORBAL; freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NFS Mount Hangs CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the University of Guelph. Do= not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and kn= ow the content is safe. If in doubt, forward suspicious emails to IThelp@uo= guelph.ca >From what i understand rick stating around the socket state changing before= the upcall, i can only speculate that the rst fight is for the new sessios= the client tries with the same 5tuple, while server side the old original = session persists, as the nfs server never closes /shutdown the session . But a debug logged version of the socket upcall used by the nfs server shou= ld reveal any differences in socket state at the time of upcall. I would very much like to know if d29690 addresses that problem (if it was = due to releasing the lock before the upcall), or if that still shows differ= ences between prior to my central upcall change, post that change and with = d29690 ... ________________________________ Von: tuexen@freebsd.org Gesendet: Sunday, April 11, 2021 2:30:09 PM An: Rick Macklem Cc: Scheffenegger, Richard ; Youssef GHOR= BAL ; freebsd-net@freebsd.org Betreff: Re: NFS Mount Hangs NetApp Security WARNING: This is an external email. Do not click links or o= pen attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is saf= e. > On 10. Apr 2021, at 23:59, Rick Macklem wrote: > > tuexen@freebsd.org wrote: >> Rick wrote: > [stuff snipped] >>>> With r367492 you don't get the upcall with the same error state? Or yo= u don't get an error on a write() call, when there should be one? >> If Send-Q is 0 when the network is partitioned, after healing, the krpc = sees no activity on >> the socket (until it acquires/processes an RPC it will not do a sosend()= ). >> Without the 6minute timeout, the RST battle goes on "forever" (I've neve= r actually >> waited more than 30minutes, which is close enough to "forever" for me). >> --> With the 6minute timeout, the "battle" stops after 6minutes, when th= e timeout >> causes a soshutdown(..SHUT_WR) on the socket. >> (Since the soshutdown() patch is not yet in "main". I got comments, = but no "reviewed" >> on it, the 6minute timer won't help if enabled in main. The soclose= () won't happen >> for TCP connections with the back channel enabled, such as Linux 4.= 1/4.2 ones.) >> I'm confused. So you are saying that if the Send-Q is empty when you par= tition the >> network, and the peer starts to send SYNs after the healing, FreeBSD res= ponds >> with a challenge ACK which triggers the sending of a RST by Linux. This = RST is >> ignored multiple times. >> Is that true? Even with my patch for the the bug I introduced? > Yes and yes. > Go take another look at linuxtofreenfs.pcap > ("fetch https://people.freebsd.org/~rmacklem/linuxtofreenfs.pcap" if you = don't > already have it.) > Look at packet #1949->2069. I use wireshark, but you'll have your favouri= te. > You'll see the "RST battle" that ends after > 6minutes at packet#2069. If there is no 6minute timeout enabled in the > server side krpc, then the battle just continues (I once let it run for a= bout > 30minutes before giving up). The 6minute timeout is not currently enabled > in main, etc. Hmm. I don't understand why r367492 can impact the processing of the RST, w= hich basically destroys the TCP connection. Richard: Can you explain that? Best regards Michael > >> What version of the kernel are you using? > "main" dated Dec. 23, 2020 + your bugfix + assorted NFS patches that > are not relevant + 2 small krpc related patches. > --> The two small krpc related patches enable the 6minute timeout and > add a soshutdown(..SHUT_WR) call when the 6minute timeout is > triggered. These have no effect until the 6minutes is up and, witho= ut > them the "RTS battle" goes on forever. > > Add to the above a revert of r367492 and the RST battle goes away and thi= ngs > behave as expected. The recovery happens quickly after the network is > unpartitioned, with either 0 or 1 RSTs. > > rick > ps: Once the irrelevant NFS patches make it into "main", I will upgrade t= o > main bits-de-jur for testing. > > Best regards > Michael >> >> If Send-Q is non-empty when the network is partitioned, the battle will = not happen. >> >>> >>> My understanding is that he needs this error indication when calling sh= utdown(). >> There are several ways the krpc notices that a TCP connection is no long= er functional. >> - An error return like EPIPE from either sosend() or soreceive(). >> - A return of 0 from soreceive() with no data (normal EOF from other end= ). >> - A 6minute timeout on the server end, when no activity has occurred on = the >> connection. This timer is currently disabled for NFSv4.1/4.2 mounts in "= main", >> but I enabled it for this testing, to stop the "RST battle goes on forev= er" >> during testing. I am thinking of enabling it on "main", but this crude b= andaid >> shouldn't be thought of as a "fix for the RST battle". >> >>>> >>>> From what you describe, this is on writes, isn't it? (I'm asking, at t= he original problem that was fixed with r367492, occurs in the read path (d= raining of ths so_rcv buffer in the upcall right away, which subsequently i= nfluences the ACK sent by the stack). >>>> >>>> I only added the so_snd buffer after some discussion, if the WAKESOR s= houldn't have a symmetric equivalent on WAKESOW.... >>>> >>>> Thus a partial backout (leaving the WAKESOR part inside, but reverting= the WAKESOW part) would still fix my initial problem about erraneous DSACK= s (which can also lead to extremely poor performance with Linux clients), b= ut possible address this issue... >>>> >>>> Can you perhaps take MAIN and apply https://reviews.freebsd.org/D29690= for the revert only on the so_snd upcall? >> Since the krpc only uses receive upcalls, I don't see how reverting the = send side would have >> any effect? >> >>> Since the release of 13.0 is almost done, can we try to fix the issue i= nstead of reverting the commit? >> I think it has already shipped broken. >> I don't know if an errata is possible, or if it will be broken until 13.= 1. >> >> --> I am much more concerned with the otis@ stuck client problem than th= is RST battle that only >> occurs after a network partitioning, especially if it is 13.0 speci= fic. >> I did this testing to try to reproduce Jason's stuck client (with c= onnection in CLOSE_WAIT) >> problem, which I failed to reproduce. >> >> rick >> >> Rs: agree, a good understanding where the interaction btwn stack, socket= and in kernel tcp user breaks is needed; >> >>> >>> If this doesn't help, some major surgery will be necessary to prevent N= FS sessions with SACK enabled, to transmit DSACKs... >> >> My understanding is that the problem is related to getting a local error= indication after >> receiving a RST segment too late or not at all. >> >> Rs: but the move of the upcall should not materially change that; i don= =92t have a pc here to see if any upcall actually happens on rst... >> >> Best regards >> Michael >>> >>> >>>> I know from a printf that this happened, but whether it caused the RST= battle to not happen, I don't know. >>>> >>>> I can put r367492 back in and do more testing if you'd like, but I thi= nk it probably needs to be reverted? >>> >>> Please, I don't quite understand why the exact timing of the upcall wou= ld be that critical here... >>> >>> A comparison of the soxxx calls and errors between the "good" and the "= bad" would be perfect. I don't know if this is easy to do though, as these = calls appear to be scattered all around the RPC / NFS source paths. >>> >>>> This does not explain the original hung Linux client problem, but does= shed light on the RST war I could create by doing a network partitioning. >>>> >>>> rick >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list >>> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net >>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list >> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"