At 02:35 PM 4/8/2008, Trond Myklebust wrote: >The only justification for passing more errors up to the higher layers >is if they have different error handling requirements. >The reason why we currently transform more or less everything into >ENOTCONN is because the two other errors ECONNRESET and ECONNREFUSED >basically require the same kind of error handling (exit with EIO in the >"soft" case, and keep retrying in the "hard" case). > >So, what kind of RDMA errors are these, and how are we failing to handle >them correctly today? Actually, I think I replied to the wrong message - I meant to reply to the leak, not the error! But yes, the RDMA transport needs to return the "right" error - I just wish there were a betterlist. At one point I believe xprtrdma returned EINVAL (because the rdma connection code returned it to us), and the mount command helpfully printed "internal error". I.e., it was valid, but not useful. Tom. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
