On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 07:30 +0300, Benny Halevy wrote:
> Trond,
>
> Is the patch below acceptable?
>
> Benny
I'm still not entirely happy with the idea that the state manager can
get into situations where it needs outside help, and you haven't really
explained to me the root cause of the scenario.
You said something about
nfs4_create_server()
nfs4_init_session()
nfs4_recover_expired_lease()
nfs4_schedule_state_recovery()
# and the failure happens within the state engine
nfs4_proc_create_session()
nfs4_proc_get_lease_time() return -2
Where does that ENOENT come from?
You said something about it being an error in OP_PUTROOTFH, but as far
as I can see, the only permitted errors for putrootfh are either session
related errors (which should be handled by the state machine),
NFS4ERR_DELAY (which should be handled by the state machine) and
NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC. So which error is generating your ENOENT?
--
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer
NetApp
Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx
www.netapp.com
--
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
