Re: [PULL REQUEST] nfsd changes for 4.15

[Chuck Lever]

> On Nov 18, 2017, at 2:40 PM, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:40 AM, J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Please pull nfsd changes for 4.15 from:
> 
> Hmm. This had a tracepoint conflict with the nfs client pull.

Guessing you mean:

commit a30ccf1a9eb8c01f37675758f6359a968193d96e
Author:     Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx>
AuthorDate: Fri Oct 20 10:35:18 2017 -0400
Commit:     Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker@xxxxxxxxxx>
CommitDate: Fri Nov 17 16:43:44 2017 -0500

    SUNRPC: Fix parsing failure in trace points with XIDs
    
    mount.nf-11159   8....   905.248380: xprt_transmit:        [FAILED TO PARSE] xid=351291440 status=0 addr=192.168.2.5 port=20049
    mount.nf-11159   8....   905.248381: rpc_task_sleep:       task:6210@1 flags=0e80 state=0005 status=0 timeout=60000 queue=xprt_pending
    kworker/-1591    1....   905.248419: xprt_lookup_rqst:     [FAILED TO PARSE] xid=351291440 status=0 addr=192.168.2.5 port=20049
    kworker/-1591    1....   905.248423: xprt_complete_rqst:   [FAILED TO PARSE] xid=351291440 status=24 addr=192.168.2.5 port=20049
    
    Byte swapping is not available during trace-cmd report.
    
    Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx>
    Signed-off-by: Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker@xxxxxxxxxx>

conflicted with

commit e9d4bf219c83d09579bc62512fea2ca10f025d93
Author:     Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
AuthorDate: Tue Oct 10 17:31:42 2017 -0400
Commit:     J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxx>
CommitDate: Wed Oct 11 17:08:52 2017 -0400

    SUNRPC: Fix tracepoint storage issues with svc_recv and svc_rqst_status
    
    There is no guarantee that either the request or the svc_xprt exist
    by the time we get round to printing the trace message.
    
    Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
    Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
    Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxx>

and that you adjusted a30ccf1a9eb8c01f37675758f6359a968193d96e
to eliminate the merge conflict.

At a glance I don't see a problem with the finished result.

I could have separated a30ccf1a9eb8c01f37675758f6359a968193d96e
into a server-side and client-side change.


> The resolution seems obvious and I did it, but I'd like people to
> review the end result but particularly also their workflows, because I
> don't think that conflict was reported anywhere and doesn't seem to
> exist in next-20171115.
> 
> It certainly wasn't mentioned to me in either pull request.
> 
> Were the nfs client changes not in next?
> 
> Tssk.
> 
>                      Linus

--
Chuck Lever