From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from merit-proxy02.merit.edu ([207.75.116.194]:60825 "EHLO merit-proxy02.merit.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751267Ab1HEMkU (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Aug 2011 08:40:20 -0400 Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 08:40:15 -0400 From: Jim Rees To: Max Matveev Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, steved@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Update nfs(5) manpage - timeo for NFS/TCP Message-ID: <20110805124015.GA16926@merit.edu> References: <20110805021903.C84608198734@regina.usersys.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20110805021903.C84608198734@regina.usersys.redhat.com> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Max Matveev wrote: NFS/TCP does linear backoff then retransmiting - the manpage was mistakenly asserting the "no backoff" theory. Actually, now that I made you change the wording, I think the original wording was correct. "Backoff" refers to an increase in the interval between retries. Since the interval is constant, there is no backoff. I could be wrong. I think the term "backoff" was first used this way in ALOHA. I've got some papers around here somewhere and can check. But maybe the best thing would be to remove any reference to backoff, and talk about retry instead.