All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Steve Wise" <swise@opengridcomputing.com>
To: "'Chuck Lever'" <chucklever@gmail.com>
Cc: "'J. Bruce Fields'" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
	"'Linux NFS Mailing List'" <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	"'linux-rdma'" <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>,
	"'Tom Tucker'" <tom@opengridcomputing.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V2 RFC 2/3] svcrdma: Recvfrom changes
Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 13:11:40 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <009601cf6f9f$f47b2cb0$dd718610$@opengridcomputing.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2AEECADA-4A40-4BF2-866E-7F178D016DDE@gmail.com>


> >
> >> If you print ch_count, it is 2 for NFS WRITEs from a Linux client,
> >> no matter how large the write payload is. Therefore I think the check
> >> as it is written is not particularly useful.
> >
> > Why are there 2?
> 
> The first chunk lists the pages the server is to read, and the second
> chunk has the zero pad for XDR alignment.
> 
> If pad optimization is enabled on the client, there is just 1 chunk in
> the RPC's Read list.
> 

So the code as it stands violates the RFC by sending 2 chunks?  And if I change the server
to only consume 1, then everything unaligned will break?




WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Steve Wise" <swise-7bPotxP6k4+P2YhJcF5u+vpXobYPEAuW@public.gmane.org>
To: 'Chuck Lever' <chucklever-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: "'J. Bruce Fields'"
	<bfields-uC3wQj2KruNg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>,
	'Linux NFS Mailing List'
	<linux-nfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	'linux-rdma' <linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	'Tom Tucker'
	<tom-7bPotxP6k4+P2YhJcF5u+vpXobYPEAuW@public.gmane.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V2 RFC 2/3] svcrdma: Recvfrom changes
Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 13:11:40 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <009601cf6f9f$f47b2cb0$dd718610$@opengridcomputing.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2AEECADA-4A40-4BF2-866E-7F178D016DDE-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>


> >
> >> If you print ch_count, it is 2 for NFS WRITEs from a Linux client,
> >> no matter how large the write payload is. Therefore I think the check
> >> as it is written is not particularly useful.
> >
> > Why are there 2?
> 
> The first chunk lists the pages the server is to read, and the second
> chunk has the zero pad for XDR alignment.
> 
> If pad optimization is enabled on the client, there is just 1 chunk in
> the RPC's Read list.
> 

So the code as it stands violates the RFC by sending 2 chunks?  And if I change the server
to only consume 1, then everything unaligned will break?



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  reply	other threads:[~2014-05-14 18:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-05-06 17:46 [PATCH V2 RFC 0/3] svcrdma: refactor marshalling logic Steve Wise
2014-05-06 17:46 ` Steve Wise
2014-05-06 17:46 ` [PATCH V2 RFC 1/3] svcrdma: Transport and header file changes Steve Wise
2014-05-06 17:46   ` Steve Wise
2014-05-06 19:21   ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-05-06 19:21     ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-05-06 21:02     ` Steve Wise
2014-05-06 21:02       ` Steve Wise
2014-05-06 21:13       ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-05-06 21:13         ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-05-06 17:46 ` [PATCH V2 RFC 2/3] svcrdma: Recvfrom changes Steve Wise
2014-05-06 17:46   ` Steve Wise
2014-05-13 18:22   ` Chuck Lever
2014-05-13 18:22     ` Chuck Lever
2014-05-13 20:37     ` Steve Wise
2014-05-13 20:37       ` Steve Wise
2014-05-13 21:44       ` Chuck Lever
2014-05-13 21:44         ` Chuck Lever
2014-05-14 14:26         ` Steve Wise
2014-05-14 14:26           ` Steve Wise
2014-05-14 14:39           ` Chuck Lever
2014-05-14 14:39             ` Chuck Lever
2014-05-14 18:11             ` Steve Wise [this message]
2014-05-14 18:11               ` Steve Wise
2014-05-14 18:21               ` Chuck Lever
2014-05-14 18:21                 ` Chuck Lever
2014-05-14 18:24                 ` Steve Wise
2014-05-14 18:24                   ` Steve Wise
2014-05-06 17:46 ` [PATCH V2 RFC 3/3] svcrdma: Sendto changes Steve Wise
2014-05-06 17:46   ` Steve Wise
2014-05-06 19:27 ` [PATCH V2 RFC 0/3] svcrdma: refactor marshalling logic J. Bruce Fields
2014-05-06 19:27   ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-05-06 21:09   ` Steve Wise
2014-05-06 21:09     ` Steve Wise
2014-05-19 19:07     ` Devesh Sharma
2014-05-19 19:07       ` Devesh Sharma
2014-05-19 19:14       ` Steve Wise
2014-05-19 19:14         ` Steve Wise
2014-05-20  5:42         ` Devesh Sharma
2014-05-20  5:42           ` Devesh Sharma

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='009601cf6f9f$f47b2cb0$dd718610$@opengridcomputing.com' \
    --to=swise@opengridcomputing.com \
    --cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=chucklever@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tom@opengridcomputing.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.