Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-nfs+bounces-3369-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Message-ID: <8b52b6aa4376397cb2d71520e1c686318bcdecf9.camel@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: NFSD: Unable to initialize client recovery tracking! (-110)
From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
To: Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@lists.linux.dev>, Paul
 Menzel <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>, Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, it+linux-nfs@molgen.mpg.de, Linus Torvalds
	 <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 08:46:21 -0400
In-Reply-To: <90700421-4567-4e28-ae71-8541086b46e2@leemhuis.info>
References: <aaeae060-2be0-4b9f-818c-1b7d87e41a5f@molgen.mpg.de>
	 <e8ab863e-18a5-4c16-b0c8-a3ab6440a9f6@molgen.mpg.de>
	 <5096230634b5bab2e5094c0d52780ffe2fa75bb9.camel@kernel.org>
	 <90700421-4567-4e28-ae71-8541086b46e2@leemhuis.info>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.50.4 (3.50.4-1.fc39) 
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0

On Fri, 2024-05-24 at 13:16 +0200, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten
Leemhuis) wrote:
> On 21.05.24 12:01, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > On Tue, 2024-05-21 at 11:55 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
> > > Am 19.04.24 um 18:50 schrieb Paul Menzel:
> > >=20
> > > > Since at least Linux 6.8-rc6, Linux logs the warning below:
> > > >=20
> > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 NFSD: Unable to initialize client recovery=
 tracking! (-
> > > > 110)
> > > >=20
> > > > I haven=E2=80=99t had time to bisect yet, so if you have an idea,
> > > > that=E2=80=99d be great.
> > >=20
> > > 74fd48739d0488e39ae18b0168720f449a06690c is the first bad commit
> > > commit 74fd48739d0488e39ae18b0168720f449a06690c
> > > Author: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
> > > Date:=C2=A0=C2=A0 Fri Oct 13 09:03:53 2023 -0400
> > >=20
> > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 nfsd: new Kconfig option for legacy client t=
racking
> > >=20
> > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 We've had a number of attempts at different =
NFSv4 client
> > > tracking
> > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 methods over the years, but now nfsdcld has =
emerged as the
> > > clear winner
> > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 since the others (recoverydir and the usermo=
dehelper upcall)
> > > are
> > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 problematic.
> > [...]
> > It sounds like you need to enable nfsdcld in your environment. The
> > old
> > recovery tracking methods are deprecated. The only surviving one
> > requires the nfsdcld daemon to be running when recovery tracking is
> > started. Alternately, you can enable this option in your kernels if
> > you
> > want to keep using the deprecated methods in the interim.
>=20
> Hmm. Then why didn't this new config option default to "Y" for a
> while
> (say a year or two) before changing the default to off? That would
> have
> prevented people like Paul from running into the problem when running
> "olddefconfig". I think that is what Linus would have wanted in a
> case
> like this, but might be totally wrong there (I CCed him, in case he
> wants to share his opinion, but maybe he does not care much).
>=20
> But I guess that's too late now, unless we want to meddle with config
> option names. But I guess that might not be worth it after half a
> year
> for something that only causes a warning (aiui).
>=20
> Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker'
> hat)
> --
> Everything you wanna know about Linux kernel regression tracking:
> https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/about/#tldr
> If I did something stupid, please tell me, as explained on that page.
>=20

We simply changed the default in the Kconfig. That does not constitute
a regression, IMO. Why on earth would we continue to default enable an
option that we intend to deprecate in the near future?
--=20
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>