[Ocfs2-devel] [patch 3/3] OCFS2 Configurable timeouts - Protocol changes

[Mark Fasheh]

On Mon, Nov 20, 2006 at 08:22:40AM +0100, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> >On Sat, Nov 18, 2006 at 08:36:03AM +0100, abeekhof at suse.de wrote:
> >>The addition of two dummy fields is a temporary measure to
> >>   satisfy the logic in o2net_check_handshake() and will be
> >>   rectified in a future version of this patch
> >Maybe I'm being silly, but I just can't seem to figure out  
> >precisely which
> >logic you're talking about here. Can you elaborate, please?
> 
> Sorry, I meant the logic that controlls when o2net_check_handshake()  
> is called by o2net_advance_rx().
> 
> Specifically, this comment:
> 			/* this working relies on the handshake being
> 			 * smaller than the normal message header */
Ahh, ok. Do you have a specific fix in mind? I've CC'd Zach - he
might have an idea. Otherwise, I'm not really too worried about growing the
o2net_msg structure by a little bit - we ought to rename the fields to
something like 'reserved0' and 'reserved1' though.


> >>+static void o2net_initialize_handshake(void)
> >>+{
> >>+	static int initialized = 0;
> >>+	if(initialized)
> >>+		return;
> >>+
> >>+	initialized = 1;
> >>+	o2net_hand->o2net_idle_timeout_ms = cpu_to_be32(
> >>+		o2net_idle_timeout(NULL));
> >>+	o2net_hand->o2net_keepalive_delay_ms = cpu_to_be32(
> >>+		o2net_keepalive_delay(NULL));
> >>+	o2net_hand->o2net_reconnect_delay_ms = cpu_to_be32(
> >>+		o2net_reconnect_delay(NULL));
> >>+}
> >We should populate o2hb_heartbeat_timeout_ms here.
> 
> is a constant ok?  I left out all other references to heartbeat  
> timeouts.
Why not just populate it with O2HB_MAX_WRITE_TIMEOUT_MS? o2hb_dead_threshold
is already not allowed to be changed once the cluster is up btw.
	--Mark

--
Mark Fasheh
Senior Software Developer, Oracle
mark.fasheh at oracle.com