On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 01:14 +0100, Stephen R. van den Berg wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 01:07, Stephen R. van den Berg <srb@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > RPC: worker connecting xprt cfa94400 to address: addr=1.2.3.151
> > port=2049 proto=tcp
> > RPC: cfa94400 connect status 99 connected 0 sock state 7
>
> errno 99 means EADDRNOTAVAIL. In userspace this normally is solved by
> using the REUSEADDR sockopt. In xprtsock.c we try something like:
>
> /* We're probably in TIME_WAIT. Get rid of existing socket,
> * and retry
> */
> set_bit(XPRT_CONNECTION_CLOSE, &xprt->state);
> xprt_force_disconnect(xprt);
>
> I'd guess that this needs to be fixed, or the REUSEADDR sockopt needs to be set.
Does the following patch fix matters?
Trond
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUNRPC: Ensure that we honour autoclose before attempting to reconnect
From: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx>
If the XPRT_CLOSE_WAIT flag is set, we need to ensure that we call
xprt->ops->close() while holding xprt_lock_write() before we can
start reconnecting.
Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
net/sunrpc/xprt.c | 4 ++++
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/sunrpc/xprt.c b/net/sunrpc/xprt.c
index fd46d42..469de29 100644
--- a/net/sunrpc/xprt.c
+++ b/net/sunrpc/xprt.c
@@ -700,6 +700,10 @@ void xprt_connect(struct rpc_task *task)
}
if (!xprt_lock_write(xprt, task))
return;
+
+ if (test_and_clear_bit(XPRT_CLOSE_WAIT, &xprt->state))
+ xprt->ops->close(xprt);
+
if (xprt_connected(xprt))
xprt_release_write(xprt, task);
else {
--
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
