Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-nfs+bounces-1254-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1;
From: Samasth Norway Ananda <samasth.norway.ananda@oracle.com>
To: bcodding@redhat.com
Cc: samasth.norway.ananda@oracle.com, chuck.lever@oracle.com,
        linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH  1/1] NFSv4.1: Assign retries to timeout.to_retries instead of timeout.to_initval
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 09:23:53 -0800
Message-ID: <20240122172353.2859254-1-samasth.norway.ananda@oracle.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

In the else block we are assigning the req->rq_xprt->timeout->to_retries
value to timeout.to_initval, whereas it should have been assigned to
timeout.to_retries instead.

Fixes: 57331a59ac0d (“NFSv4.1: Use the nfs_client's rpc timeouts for backchannel")
Signed-off-by: Samasth Norway Ananda <samasth.norway.ananda@oracle.com>
---
Hi,

I came across the patch 57331a59ac0d (“NFSv4.1: Use the nfs_client's rpc 
timeouts for backchannel") which assigns value to same variable in the
else block.  Can I please get your input on the patch?

Thank you.
---
 net/sunrpc/svc.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/net/sunrpc/svc.c b/net/sunrpc/svc.c
index f60c93e5a25d..295266a50244 100644
--- a/net/sunrpc/svc.c
+++ b/net/sunrpc/svc.c
@@ -1601,7 +1601,7 @@ void svc_process_bc(struct rpc_rqst *req, struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
 		timeout.to_retries = rqstp->bc_to_initval;
 	} else {
 		timeout.to_initval = req->rq_xprt->timeout->to_initval;
-		timeout.to_initval = req->rq_xprt->timeout->to_retries;
+		timeout.to_retries = req->rq_xprt->timeout->to_retries;
 	}
 	memcpy(&req->rq_snd_buf, &rqstp->rq_res, sizeof(req->rq_snd_buf));
 	task = rpc_run_bc_task(req, &timeout);
-- 
2.42.0