On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 11:01 AM Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 2/13/25 10:47 AM, Olga Kornievskaia wrote:
> > Don't ignore return code of adding rdma listener. If nfs.conf has asked
> > for "rdma=y" but adding the listener fails, don't ignore the failure.
> > Note in soft-rdma-provider environment (such as soft iwarp, soft roce),
> > when no address-constraints are used, an "any" listener is created and
> > rdma-enabling is done independently.
>
> This behavior is confusing... I suggest that an nfs.conf man page
> update accompany the below code change.
Do you find only the rdma=y soft-rdma case confusing, or do you find
that when listeners fail and we shouldn't start knfsd threads in
general confusing?
It was always the case that if rdma=y is done, then any listener
created for it does not check whether or not the underlying interface
is already rdma-enabled. This hasn't changed. Nor does this patch
change it.
> Reviewed-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> > Fixes: e3b72007ab31 ("nfs-utils: nfsdctl: cleanup listeners if some failed")
> > Signed-off-by: Olga Kornievskaia <okorniev@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > utils/nfsdctl/nfsdctl.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/utils/nfsdctl/nfsdctl.c b/utils/nfsdctl/nfsdctl.c
> > index 05fecc71..244910ef 100644
> > --- a/utils/nfsdctl/nfsdctl.c
> > +++ b/utils/nfsdctl/nfsdctl.c
> > @@ -1388,7 +1388,7 @@ static int configure_listeners(void)
> > if (tcp)
> > ret = add_listener("tcp", n->field, port);
> > if (rdma)
> > - add_listener("rdma", n->field, rdma_port);
> > + ret = add_listener("rdma", n->field, rdma_port);
> > if (ret)
> > return ret;
> > }
> > @@ -1398,7 +1398,7 @@ static int configure_listeners(void)
> > if (tcp)
> > ret = add_listener("tcp", "", port);
> > if (rdma)
> > - add_listener("rdma", "", rdma_port);
> > + ret = add_listener("rdma", "", rdma_port);
> > }
> > return ret;
> > }
>
>
> --
> Chuck Lever
>
