Re: iov_iter_pipe warning.

[Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>]

On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:19:18AM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
 > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 06:54:30PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
 >  > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 03:03:18PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
 >  > 
 >  > > Well it's been running an hour without incident, which looks promising.
 >  > > I'll leave it run, but I'd say you're on the right track given how quick
 >  > > it reproduced so far.
 >  > 
 >  > Could you try this and see if it works?  What happens is that unlike
 >  > e.g. generic_file_read_iter/generic_file_write_iter, NFS O_DIRECT handling
 >  > does not make sure that iov_iter had been advanced by the amount
 >  > actually transferred - it is left advanced by the amount *requested*.
 > 
 > Sorry for delay on this, been sick.   Just gave this a run for 12 hours.
 > Looks good to me.

Actually.. client seems fine, but I've noticed these on the server now..

[977286.117268] RPC request reserved 116 but used 268
[1918138.126285] RPC request reserved 200 but used 268
[2327777.483077] RPC request reserved 200 but used 268
[2327800.909007] RPC request reserved 200 but used 268

related ?

	Dave