Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2022 21:57:21 +0000 From: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> To: FreeBSD Filesystems <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> Cc: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org>, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> Subject: RFC: Should intr/soft NFSv4 mounts be disabled? Message-ID: <YQBPR0101MB974216B2F2B1DCFF976D2065DDBD9@YQBPR0101MB9742.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
index | next in thread | raw e-mail
Hi, NFSv4 mounts using the "soft" and/or "intr" mount options have never functioned correctly. This is noted in the BUGS section of "man mount_nfs" and commit c0d14b0220ae added the generation of a warning message when such a mount is done. The breakage can occur when the server is slow/overloaded or network partitioned such that the RPC reply is not received for over 1 second, resulting in the RPC attempt to fail without the RPC reply being processed. Breakage of the protocol has become more frequent for NFSv4.1/4.2 mounts since, when a syscall returns before the RPC reply is processed, it leaves the session slot for the RPC non-usable. When all slots are non-usable, the mount is hung. During review of commit c0d14b0220ae, emaste@ asked if NFSv4 mounts using "soft" and/or "intr" should actually be disabled, so I am now asking others for their opinion on this? (Doing so will cause many extant mounts in fstab(5) to fail.) Thanks for any comments, rickhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?YQBPR0101MB974216B2F2B1DCFF976D2065DDBD9>