All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Tucker <tom@opengridcomputing.com>
To: "Iyer, Rahul" <Rahul.Iyer@netapp.com>
Cc: "Talpey, Thomas" <Thomas.Talpey@netapp.com>,
	Linux NFS Mailing List <nfs@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	Peter Leckie <pleckie@melbourne.sgi.com>,
	Greg Banks <gnb@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC,PATCH 3/14] knfsd: prepare reply per transport
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 10:26:27 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1179415587.23385.9.camel@trinity.ogc.int> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7619F3097FAB384287CF636FF92D0CA10976B38B@exsvl01.hq.netapp.com>


I think this is worth considering. Since the client can receive requests
in 4.1, the distinction becomes arbitrary.

On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 02:16 -0700, Iyer, Rahul wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> I like the idea of a transport switch for the server side. The way I see
> it, it's not just the server, it's also the "callback server" on the
> client that can benefit. 
> 
> I had a question. Maybe it's a dumb question, and I may be way off base,
> but I don't see why we need 2 transport switches - one for the client,
> one for the server? Why not have one? 
> I've written some code to do NFSv4.1 callbacks and wound up implementing
> another "transport". Since in v4.1 it's actually possible for clients to
> send requests (fore-channel) and receive callbacks (back channel) over
> the same connection, I had to "make" another transport that essentially
> did TCP, but used server side conventions for the rpc_xprt_ops send
> routines so that the server could use the existing rpc_call_(a)sync()
> mechanisms. Similarly, on the client side, I had to implement the
> equivalent of the svc_send() routines using the client side xs_tcp_*
> routines. The resultant code is reasonably clean, but screams out
> "inefficiency" because of the small amount of code sharing that was
> actually possible.
> 
> Given this, a unified transport switch would really rock. Both the
> client and the server treat the connection as a "full duplex" (I mean
> can send calls and receive replies on the same connection). One set of
> tcp/udp read/write methods for both the client and server. No more
> svc_send for the server and xs_*_send_request on the client. The one
> true networking way to rule them both! Everything would be much cleaner,
> and since we're going down this path, I assumed it's a feasibility study
> worth doing. Maybe I'm oversimplifying, but this seems doable. After
> all, what we're doing in both cases (client and server) is shoving bits
> down a socket. Is my question justified or am I *way* off base and
> ignorant of some fundamental issues(s)?
> Thanks
> Regards
> Rahul
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Greg Banks [mailto:gnb@sgi.com] 
> > Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 12:54 AM
> > To: Tom Tucker
> > Cc: Linux NFS Mailing List; Talpey, Thomas; Peter Leckie; Greg Banks
> > Subject: Re: [NFS] [RFC,PATCH 3/14] knfsd: prepare reply per transport
> > 
> > On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 04:35:07PM -0500, Tom Tucker wrote:
> > > 
> > > Greg:
> > > 
> > > I like this patch organization. I'll replicate this in the 
> > integrated 
> > > tree...
> > 
> > Great.
> > 
> > > > + /* Will be turned off only in gss privacy case: */
> > > > + rqstp->rq_sendfile_ok = 1;
> > > 
> > > I think this belongs in the svc_process logic. It doesn't have 
> > > anything to do with the buffer, but rather whether or not 
> > GSS is turned on.
> > 
> > Fixed.
> > 
> > I'll push a revised patchset including feedback from yourself 
> > and Bruce, to you only, in a few minutes.
> > 
> > Greg.
> > --
> > Greg Banks, R&D Software Engineer, SGI Australian Software Group.
> > Apparently, I'm Bedevere.  Which MPHG character are you?
> > I don't speak for SGI.
> > 
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > -----------
> > This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 
> > Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control 
> > of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
> > http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
> > _______________________________________________
> > NFS maillist  -  NFS@lists.sourceforge.net 
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
> > 


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist  -  NFS@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs

  reply	other threads:[~2007-05-17 15:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-05-16 19:20 [RFC,PATCH 3/14] knfsd: prepare reply per transport Greg Banks
2007-05-16 20:53 ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-05-17  7:01   ` Greg Banks
2007-05-16 21:35 ` Tom Tucker
2007-05-17  7:53   ` Greg Banks
2007-05-17  9:16     ` Iyer, Rahul
2007-05-17 15:26       ` Tom Tucker [this message]
2007-05-18  3:16       ` Greg Banks
2007-05-18  4:01         ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-05-18  4:08           ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-05-18 14:42         ` Trond Myklebust
2007-05-17 10:48 ` Neil Brown
2007-05-18  6:00   ` Greg Banks

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=1179415587.23385.9.camel@trinity.ogc.int \
    --to=tom@opengridcomputing.com \
    --cc=Rahul.Iyer@netapp.com \
    --cc=Thomas.Talpey@netapp.com \
    --cc=gnb@sgi.com \
    --cc=nfs@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=pleckie@melbourne.sgi.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.