> On Sep 23, 2016, at 14:25, Olga Kornievskaia <aglo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Trond Myklebust
> <trondmy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sep 23, 2016, at 13:59, Olga Kornievskaia <aglo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Trond Myklebust
>>> <trondmy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 23, 2016, at 13:40, Olga Kornievskaia <aglo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> If we instead bump the sequence number in the case of interrupted and do:
>>>>
>>>> You have no guarantees that the server has seen and processed the operation.
>>>
>>> That is correct, i have tested the patch and made server never to
>>> receive the operation and client have an interrupted slot. On the next
>>> operation the server will complain back with SEQ_MISORDERED. Client
>>> can recover from this operation. Client can not recover from "Remote
>>> EIO”.
>>>
>>
>> Why not?
>
> When XDR layer returns EREMOTEIO it's not handled by the NFS error
> recovery (are you suggesting we should?) and returns that to the
> application.
>
I’m saying that if we get a SEQ_MISORDERED due to a previous interrupt on that slot, then we should ignore the error in task->tk_status, and just retry after bumping the slot seqid.
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��w��� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
