Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-nfs+bounces-1271-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
From: Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@redhat.com>
To: Samasth Norway Ananda <samasth.norway.ananda@oracle.com>
Cc: chuck.lever@oracle.com, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH  1/1] NFSv4.1: Assign retries to timeout.to_retries
 instead of timeout.to_initval
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 17:41:18 -0500
Message-ID: <995F0BB9-C709-4C3A-92F3-5EB9710A47F5@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240122172353.2859254-1-samasth.norway.ananda@oracle.com>
References: <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

On 22 Jan 2024, at 12:23, Samasth Norway Ananda wrote:

> 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?

Oh yes, this a good fix.  Usually the maintainers won't pick up a patch
that's only sent to the list, rather the patch should be addressed to them
directly and copied to the list.  Can you re-send this patch to:

Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com>,Anna Schumaker <anna@kernel.org>

and copy linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org?  You can also add my:

Reviewed-by: Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@redhat.com>

Ben