On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 04:03:37PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote: > We're also missing a handler for NFS4ERR_DELAY, which is listed as a > legal response to CB_RECALL in both RFC5661 and RFC3530bis. As far as > I can tell from the above, knfsd will currently take that to be a sign > it should mark the callback path as being down... Yes. I've got a fix of that further down in my queue with the pnfs patches, just wanted to set this bit out first. I plan to handle NFS4ERR_DELAY in the generic callback layer instead of burderning it onto the individual callback implementations. -- 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
