From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@primarydata.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] backchannel overflows
Date: Fri, 1 May 2015 10:37:59 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150501173759.GA23778@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHQdGtTAiwQ4rRpLCtS+V04n6hSg3R4Q3V_QFn+V2OR7bK+41w@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 01:28:12PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> The concern is not so much static vs dynamic. The concern is limiting
> incoming RPC calls to the number allowed by the NFSv4.1 session. Right
> now, the static allocation enforces the limit of 1 slot that the
> client offers to the server (albeit with the race) and so I want any
> replacement to meet the same requirement.
Either variant will allow accepting more than one backchannel
request at the RPC layer, that's the whole point. With the simple
patch I posted it will accept a 2nd one, with dynamic allocation
the number would be potentially unbound.
But given that the NFS client already enforces the slot limit
properly in validate_seqid, and even returns the proper nfs error
for this case I don't really see what enforcing it at a lower level
we we can't even report proper errors buys us.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-01 17:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-28 20:21 [PATCH, RFC] backchannel overflows Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-29 12:08 ` Kinglong Mee
2015-04-29 13:46 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-29 14:55 ` Chuck Lever
2015-04-29 14:58 ` Trond Myklebust
2015-04-29 15:14 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-29 15:24 ` Trond Myklebust
2015-04-29 17:34 ` J. Bruce Fields
2015-04-30 6:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-30 14:34 ` Chuck Lever
2015-04-30 14:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
[not found] ` <CAHQdGtRgEVXidNNYtYf4c3uS0vc6fbm-SZ5AxrY=awXYynmACw@mail.gmail.com>
2015-04-30 15:02 ` Trond Myklebust
2015-04-30 15:11 ` Chuck Lever
2015-04-30 17:41 ` Chuck Lever
2015-05-01 17:23 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-05-01 17:28 ` Trond Myklebust
2015-05-01 17:37 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2015-05-01 17:47 ` Trond Myklebust
2015-05-01 17:31 ` Chuck Lever
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=20150501173759.GA23778@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trond.myklebust@primarydata.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