From: Danny Smith Subject: Re: NFSERR_EAGAIN Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 10:55:01 +0100 Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <3F0E8975.2000009@cinesite.co.uk> References: <3F0DB088.303@cinesite.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Cc: nfs , Iain Irwin-Powell Return-path: Received: from scanman.cinesite.co.uk ([193.203.81.129]) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 19aucs-0006LN-00 for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2003 02:55:39 -0700 To: Trond Myklebust In-Reply-To: Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Trond Myklebust wrote: >>>>>>" " == Danny Smith writes: >>>>>> >>>>>> > > > Looking through nfs2xdr.c and nfs.h and googling, it seems that > > error number 11 is not properly defined, but certainly seems to > > be in use by SGI. From nfs2xdr.c: > > > { NFSERR_NXIO, ENXIO }, > > > /* { NFSERR_EAGAIN, EAGAIN }, */ > > { NFSERR_ACCES, EACCES }, > > > (EAGAIN having value 11) > > > Does anyone know much about the history of this? Was this > > removed in order to be RFC compliant, or is there a stronger > > motivation not to have this? > >Why should we be supporting something which isn't documented in the RFCs? > I really want to know how it got into the source in the first place? Is it a feature that's "not part of the standard, but seem to be widely used nevertheless" (quoting from nfs.h). Searching around shows a (very) few ocurrences of this, with Solaris and IRIX servers, although often accompanied by other issues. If the server is broken, but we can work with it anyway without upsetting anything else, this would be a "good thing" in my book (of course, we would take it up with SGI too). >What is this error anyway? Is it some SGI hack for emulating >NFS3ERR_JUKEBOX under NFSv2? > > Right now, I don't really know, but I'm guessing it's something of the sort (seems to make sense with what we're seeing). I'm trying to get a packet trace to verify this is indeed what is being sent - will update when I have further evidence. Danny -- Danny Smith Senior Systems Administrator, Cinesite (Europe) Ltd 020 7973 4000 - x4055 / dannys@cinesite.co.uk ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Parasoft Error proof Web apps, automate testing & more. Download & eval WebKing and get a free book. www.parasoft.com/bulletproofapps1 _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs