Missing license header.

Why the XXX?

Here, I think we have to ensure that the nl_pending list is empty before proceeding. Either it must already be empty (i.e., we should add an assertion), or we need some way to wait for pending requests to leave the list.

Missing license header.

This is not final version. As you see, I found out that I need to add the exactly same file twice. This is rue for all kernel rpc includes right now and I want to fix that. I already touched base with @imp , maybe he can help me first fix that for all existing headers. After that I will regenerate this review with a single instance of clnt_nl.h, and that one will have header.

This is pattern copied from other RPC clients. XXX here because we are messing with already marshaled data bypassing the xdr layer, which isn't pretty.

I have a change where the TAILQ_REMOVE() is performed by the thread that does the wakeup, either the clnt_nl_reply() or clnt_nl_close(). With that change clnt_nl_call() doesn't touch the softc after being woken up, it works solely with the request structure. I will not push it until I test it. Once tested & pushed, this concern will go away. clnt_nl_close() will leave nl_pending empty.

My experiment showed that it complicates things wrt retries loop inside clnt_nl_call(). So I will leave the TAILQ management as it is. I will assert that clnt_nl_destroy() is called only and only on a instance that doesn't have active calls through it. Obviously any sane use of this KPI must guarantee that.