Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B1C6C282C3 for ; Thu, 24 Jan 2019 12:29:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A6D82184B for ; Thu, 24 Jan 2019 12:29:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727443AbfAXM3j (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2019 07:29:39 -0500 Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.190]:2227 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727386AbfAXM3j (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2019 07:29:39 -0500 Received: from DGGEMS402-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.60]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 11257C746CD077B3C1B2; Thu, 24 Jan 2019 20:29:37 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.184.189.120) by DGGEMS402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.202) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.408.0; Thu, 24 Jan 2019 20:29:34 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH] lockd: NSMPROC_MON should be send only once even if in multithread To: Chuck Lever CC: Bruce Fields , Jeff Layton , Trond Myklebust , Anna Schumaker , Linux NFS Mailing List References: <1547705746-69554-1-git-send-email-zhangxiaoxu5@huawei.com> <4E812155-4DB4-4EF4-91ED-EDBB1B0BBFF7@gmail.com> <00390d85-d2dd-be57-4192-bff562a75684@huawei.com> From: "zhangxiaoxu (A)" Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2019 20:29:18 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.184.189.120] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org On 1/19/2019 4:59 AM, Chuck Lever wrote: > > >> On Jan 17, 2019, at 9:48 PM, zhangxiaoxu (A) wrote: >> >> >> >> On 1/17/2019 10:33 PM, Chuck Lever wrote: >>> Hi, what is the harm of sending more than one MON request for a peer? >> Maybe no harm. >> The rpc.statd won't record the peer twice. >> >> I found this when I tested the xfstest generic/089. >> The rpc task for that msg sometimes take very long time. >> rpc took 57 sec who t_mtab/2377 srv rpc.statd xid 2453489031 prog statd/100024/1 proc 2 prot 6 flags 0x680 > > MON is supposed to be a call to a local service (on the same host). > It would be interesting if you could determine why it takes so long. > Yes, I'm working for that. I think this is an optimization point. Why do we have to send multiple requests? > >> I think the msg just send only one time is enough. >> RPC and rpc.statd maybe consume for a long time on the network. > > > -- > Chuck Lever > chucklever@gmail.com > > > > >