Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-f54.google.com ([209.85.214.54]:38352 "EHLO mail-it0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750718AbdAXTkT (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jan 2017 14:40:19 -0500 Received: by mail-it0-f54.google.com with SMTP id c7so97384424itd.1 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 11:40:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <35619FC0-AD46-4BBA-9F5B-9C89364BAF82@primarydata.com> References: <35619FC0-AD46-4BBA-9F5B-9C89364BAF82@primarydata.com> From: Olga Kornievskaia Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 14:40:13 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: handling error on RECLAIM_COMPLETE To: Trond Myklebust Cc: Linux NFS Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote: > >> On Jan 24, 2017, at 14:06, Olga Kornievskaia wrote: >> >> Hi Trond, >> >> Is there a reason that nfs4_proc_reclaim_complete() isn't wrapped >> with a do while() to handle errors? > > What do we not already handle correctly in nfs4_reclaim_complete_done()? Could this be because when an error occurs rpc_done isn't called (rpc_release is called)? What I see is that if RECLAIM_COMPLETE gets an error (BAD_SESSION) the client just ignores it.