On 12/27/2012 06:07 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> We should not set con->state to CLOSED here; that happens in ceph_fault()
> in the caller, where it first asserts that the state is not yet CLOSED.
I'm not seeing the code path you're talking about.
Do you mean in the LOSSYTX case?
(I don't doubt you're right, I'm just trying to follow
along at home.)
> Avoids a BUG when the features don't match.
Is this related to the crashes reported here?
http://tracker.newdream.net/issues/3657
> Signed-off-by: Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> net/ceph/messenger.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/ceph/messenger.c b/net/ceph/messenger.c
> index 4d111fd..24a5c86 100644
> --- a/net/ceph/messenger.c
> +++ b/net/ceph/messenger.c
> @@ -1508,9 +1508,9 @@ static int process_banner(struct ceph_connection *con)
>
> static void fail_protocol(struct ceph_connection *con)
> {
> + dout("fail_protocol %p\n", con);
> reset_connection(con);
> BUG_ON(con->state != CON_STATE_NEGOTIATING);
Since fail_protocol becomes essentially a trivial wrapper
for reset_connection(), I think it should just go away
and call reset_connection() directly. The assertion that
it's in NEGOTIATING state is not very useful at the moment;
fail_protocol() is only called from process_connect(),
and that's only called from try_read when the state
is NEGOTIATING.
-Alex
> - con->state = CON_STATE_CLOSED;
> }
>
> static int process_connect(struct ceph_connection *con)
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
