Commit 0bebc633 authored by NeilBrown's avatar NeilBrown Committed by J. Bruce Fields
Browse files

sunrpc: Don't schedule an upcall on a replaced cache entry.



When a cache entry is replaced, the "expiry_time" get set to
zero by a call to "cache_fresh_locked(..., 0)" at the end of
"sunrpc_cache_update".

This low expiry time makes cache_check() think that the 'refresh_age'
is negative, so the 'age' is comparatively large and a refresh is
triggered.
However refreshing a replaced entry it pointless, it cannot achieve
anything useful.

So teach cache_check to ignore a low refresh_age when expiry_time
is zero.
Reported-by: default avatarBodo Stroesser <bstroesser@ts.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarNeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: default avatarJ. Bruce Fields <bfields@redhat.com>
parent 7715cde8
......@@ -262,7 +262,8 @@ int cache_check(struct cache_detail *detail,
if (rqstp == NULL) {
if (rv == -EAGAIN)
rv = -ENOENT;
} else if (rv == -EAGAIN || age > refresh_age/2) {
} else if (rv == -EAGAIN ||
(h->expiry_time != 0 && age > refresh_age/2)) {
dprintk("RPC: Want update, refage=%ld, age=%ld\n",
refresh_age, age);
if (!test_and_set_bit(CACHE_PENDING, &h->flags)) {
......
Markdown is supported
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment