From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: Greg Banks <gnb@sgi.com>
Cc: Linux NFS Mailing List <nfs@lists.sourceforge.net>,
"Iyer, Rahul" <Rahul.Iyer@netapp.com>,
"Talpey, Thomas" <Thomas.Talpey@netapp.com>,
Peter Leckie <pleckie@melbourne.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC,PATCH 3/14] knfsd: prepare reply per transport
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 00:01:37 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070518040137.GD30144@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070518031630.GB5104@sgi.com>
On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 01:16:30PM +1000, Greg Banks wrote:
> On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 02:16:46AM -0700, Iyer, Rahul wrote:
> > 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,
>
> A very sensible thing to do, but hard to retrofit to the existing Linux
> code without significant surgery. As you've discovered, the server and
> client code are two mostly-separate code bases (with mostly-separate
> authors and maintainers) that happen to link into the same module.
> Unifying these would be a major job. I'd love to see it happen, for
> example to unify the XDR buffering code, but it would be an uphill
> battle technically and possibly politically also. For some reason,
> code (like lockd) that lives in both the server and client side tends
> to be neglected by both camps.
>
> > Given this, a unified transport switch would really rock.
> > [...] Maybe I'm oversimplifying, but this seems doable.
>
> Yes...eventually.
And the easiest approach may be to go ahead and introduce the completely
separate server-side transport switch and then later find ways increase
code sharing between the two in incremental steps....
--b.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-18 4:01 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
2007-05-18 3:16 ` Greg Banks
2007-05-18 4:01 ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
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=20070518040137.GD30144@fieldses.org \
--to=bfields@fieldses.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox