From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, Andy Adamson <andros@netapp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfs4: allow server to change forechannel max_ops
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 14:32:23 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100525183223.GA6929@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1274806624.11283.10.camel-rJ7iovZKK19ZJLDQqaL3InhyD016LWXt@public.gmane.org>
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 12:57:04PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 12:42 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > From: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
> >
> > Section 18.36.3 of rfc 5661 says that "For the fore channel, the server
> > MAY change the requested value."
> >
> > Also, there's no reason why the client would have to care if the server
> > is willing to accept *more* operations per compound than the client
> > requested.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
> > ---
> > fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c | 1 -
> > 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > On the other hand, if the server *decreases* max_ops on the forechannel,
> > the client may need to do something. (Probably just fail for now.) Why
> > aren't we checking for that case?
> >
> > --b.
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
> > index 071fced..a5a3690 100644
> > --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
> > +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
> > @@ -4880,7 +4880,6 @@ static int nfs4_verify_channel_attrs(struct nfs41_create_session_args *args,
> >
> > ret |= _verify_fore_channel_attr(headerpadsz);
> > ret |= _verify_fore_channel_attr(max_resp_sz);
> > - ret |= _verify_fore_channel_attr(max_ops);
> >
> > ret |= _verify_back_channel_attr(headerpadsz);
> > ret |= _verify_back_channel_attr(max_rqst_sz);
>
> Yes. That all looks wrong.
>
> Can we please just get rid of that senseless macro, and open code those
> checks instead of the above patch? The current code is just pure
> obfuscation...
Sounds good to me. I'm hoping Andy can be roped into it....
--b.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-25 18:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-25 16:42 [PATCH] nfs4: allow server to change forechannel max_ops J. Bruce Fields
2010-05-25 16:57 ` Trond Myklebust
[not found] ` <1274806624.11283.10.camel-rJ7iovZKK19ZJLDQqaL3InhyD016LWXt@public.gmane.org>
2010-05-25 18:32 ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
2010-09-07 22:32 ` J. Bruce Fields
2010-10-02 5:19 ` [PATCH] nfs4: fix channel attribute sanity-checks J. Bruce Fields
2010-10-02 9:04 ` Jim Rees
2010-10-02 19:19 ` [PATCH v2] " J. Bruce Fields
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=20100525183223.GA6929@fieldses.org \
--to=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=andros@netapp.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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.