Thread (9 messages) 9 messages, 3 authors, 2023-05-15

Re: [PATCH 3/4] SUNRPC: Improve observability in svc_tcp_accept()

From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
Date: 2023-05-15 16:55:15

On Mon, 2023-05-15 at 09:32 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>

The -ENOMEM arm could fire repeatedly if the system runs low on
memory, so remove it.

Don't bother to trace -EAGAIN error events, since those fire after
a listener is created (with no work done) and once again after an
accept has been handled successfully (again, with no work done).

Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
---
 net/sunrpc/svcsock.c |    9 ++-------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c b/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c
index e0fb65e90af2..2058641ab9f6 100644
--- a/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c
+++ b/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c
@@ -885,13 +885,8 @@ static struct svc_xprt *svc_tcp_accept(struct svc_xprt *xprt)
 	clear_bit(XPT_CONN, &svsk->sk_xprt.xpt_flags);
 	err = kernel_accept(sock, &newsock, O_NONBLOCK);
 	if (err < 0) {
-		if (err == -ENOMEM)
-			printk(KERN_WARNING "%s: no more sockets!\n",
-			       serv->sv_name);
-		else if (err != -EAGAIN)
-			net_warn_ratelimited("%s: accept failed (err %d)!\n",
-					     serv->sv_name, -err);
-		trace_svcsock_accept_err(xprt, serv->sv_name, err);
+		if (err != -EAGAIN)
+			trace_svcsock_accept_err(xprt, serv->sv_name, err);
Would this be better done as a TP_CONDITION tracepoint?
 		return NULL;
 	}
 	set_bit(XPT_CONN, &svsk->sk_xprt.xpt_flags);
-- 
Jeff Layton [off-list ref]
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help