Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-nfs+bounces-3846-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 11:34:47 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Chuck Lever III <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: reservation errors during fstests on pNFS block
Message-ID: <ZmyNR8ALcWdVoe97@infradead.org>
References: <34F83726-2A28-4E29-A40E-A01BED7744EC@oracle.com>
 <Zmxx-H2KrT5QpJ-g@infradead.org>
 <C02C8230-4ACA-4F2D-AC28-B9583ADCADA5@oracle.com>
 <ZmyLSZGWDeaIXdx4@infradead.org>
 <ED7EB3B3-F56A-451F-A639-D30BBA125EE6@oracle.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ED7EB3B3-F56A-451F-A639-D30BBA125EE6@oracle.com>

On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 06:33:02PM +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote:
> > Well, they really should be alarming because the admin configured
> > a block layout setup and it did not work as expected.  So it should
> > ring alarm bells.
> 
> Yes, I expect that "pNFS: failed to open device
> /dev/disk/by-id/dm-uuid-mpath-0x6001 ..." is very likely
> operator error.

Actually that one is purely a debug message if at all - we don't know
if it is a mpath or non-mpath device, so we just try that first.
So that is totally fine to downgrade or turn into a trace point.  OTOH
a warning if you could open neither option would still be useful.