mail archive of the barebox mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] fs: nfs: Decrease NFS timeout
@ 2021-05-26  9:44 Uwe Kleine-König
  2021-05-27  7:20 ` Sascha Hauer
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2021-05-26  9:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: barebox

On a customer site we're experience a bit over 1% UDP packet loss. When
wiresharking an NFS transfer of a kernel image (with the goal to boot
via NFS) I saw 64 of 2555 RPC calls staying unanswered. With the current
timeout setting each of them introduces a delay of 2 seconds and the
whole transfer takes 137s. With the timeout reduced to 0.1s the transfer
time is not optimal (going down to approx 15 seconds) but at least it
becomes bearable.

Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
---
 fs/nfs.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/nfs.c b/fs/nfs.c
index 1130632eb3eb..1ff81a5ee1bf 100644
--- a/fs/nfs.c
+++ b/fs/nfs.c
@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ struct rpc_reply {
 	uint32_t data[0];
 };
 
-#define NFS_TIMEOUT	(2 * SECOND)
+#define NFS_TIMEOUT	(100 * MSECOND)
 #define NFS_MAX_RESEND	5
 
 struct nfs_fh {
-- 
2.30.2


_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] fs: nfs: Decrease NFS timeout
  2021-05-26  9:44 [PATCH] fs: nfs: Decrease NFS timeout Uwe Kleine-König
@ 2021-05-27  7:20 ` Sascha Hauer
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Sascha Hauer @ 2021-05-27  7:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Uwe Kleine-König; +Cc: barebox

Hi Uwe,

On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 11:44:48AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> On a customer site we're experience a bit over 1% UDP packet loss. When
> wiresharking an NFS transfer of a kernel image (with the goal to boot
> via NFS) I saw 64 of 2555 RPC calls staying unanswered. With the current
> timeout setting each of them introduces a delay of 2 seconds and the
> whole transfer takes 137s. With the timeout reduced to 0.1s the transfer
> time is not optimal (going down to approx 15 seconds) but at least it
> becomes bearable.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
> ---
>  fs/nfs.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/nfs.c b/fs/nfs.c
> index 1130632eb3eb..1ff81a5ee1bf 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs.c
> @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ struct rpc_reply {
>  	uint32_t data[0];
>  };
>  
> -#define NFS_TIMEOUT	(2 * SECOND)
> +#define NFS_TIMEOUT	(100 * MSECOND)
>  #define NFS_MAX_RESEND	5

Should we increase NFS_MAX_RESEND at the same time? Otherwise we timeout
after 500ms which doesn't seem much to me on some network hickups.

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Steuerwalder Str. 21                       | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany                  | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2021-05-27  7:22 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-05-26  9:44 [PATCH] fs: nfs: Decrease NFS timeout Uwe Kleine-König
2021-05-27  7:20 ` Sascha Hauer

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox