Hi Bruce, I have a question about that patch. According to RFC5661, NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG/NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG_TO_CACHE are only appropriate if "The reply to a Compound would exceed the channel's negotiated maximum response size.”. Given that the callers of nfsd4_encode_fattr appear to all pass in ‘buffer’ and ‘buflen’ arguments that are limited to single page, doesn’t this mean that you can end up returning nfs4err_resource in cases where nfserr_rep_too_big/nfserr_rep_too_big_to_cache are simply not appropriate? Either way, the NFS client will handle this badly. There is no recovery for NFS4ERR_RESOURCE. and we do not ever expect to hit NFSERR_REP_TOO_BIG/TOO_BIG_TO_CACHE. The latter two can presumably only be recovered by renegotiating the session and then retrying the request, which won’t work here... Cheers Trond _________________________________ Trond Myklebust Linux NFS client maintainer, PrimaryData trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- 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
