From: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@parallels.com>
To: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>,
"linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] sunrpc: Create sockets in namespaces
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 19:34:02 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CA4ADEA.2010700@parallels.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F11D1388-D48E-48F5-9711-79960B397FBF@oracle.com>
On 09/30/2010 07:16 PM, Chuck Lever wrote:
>
> On Sep 30, 2010, at 1:46 AM, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>
>>>> Shall I commit this to my for-2.6.37 tree? Objections?
>>>
>>> I think it looks OK.
>>>
>>> But I was wondering if there were any other changes needed for the RDMA
>>> transport capability, or had we decided that would happen at a latter point,
>>> or that changes are entirely unneeded
>>
>> We definitely need more changes in the RDMA transport, but I would like to
>> have it done later (unless someone other than me starts doing it earlier ;) ).
>
> OK, thanks for clearing that up. It makes sense to keep the scope of this socket
> patch set narrow, but I don't want the RDMA pieces to get lost. The more we let
> the RDMA and socket transport capabilities differ, the harder it will be to support
> RDMA in the long run.
OK, but I may have problems with the IB hardware. If you can advise me the
way to test the RDMA without it, it would be very helpful.
> Anyway, Bruce, I have no objection to the latest version of this socket patch set, fwiw.
>
>>> (are namespaces already supported in the IB stack)?
>>
>> Nope. And this makes RDMA netnsization even more harder :(
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-30 15:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-29 12:01 [PATCH v3 0/9] sunrpc: Create sockets in namespaces Pavel Emelyanov
2010-09-29 12:02 ` [PATCH 1/9] sunrpc: Factor out rpc_xprt allocation Pavel Emelyanov
2010-09-29 12:03 ` [PATCH 2/9] sunrpc: Factor out rpc_xprt freeing Pavel Emelyanov
2010-09-29 12:03 ` [PATCH 3/9] sunrpc: Add net argument to svc_create_xprt Pavel Emelyanov
2010-09-29 12:04 ` [PATCH 4/9] sunrpc: Pull net argument downto svc_create_socket Pavel Emelyanov
2010-09-29 12:04 ` [PATCH 5/9] sunrpc: Add net to rpc_create_args Pavel Emelyanov
2010-09-29 12:05 ` [PATCH 6/9] sunrpc: Add net to xprt_create Pavel Emelyanov
2010-09-29 12:05 ` [PATCH 7/9] sunrpc: Tag rpc_xprt with net Pavel Emelyanov
2010-09-29 12:06 ` [PATCH 8/9] net: Export __sock_create Pavel Emelyanov
2010-09-29 12:06 ` [PATCH 9/9] sunrpc: Create sockets in net namespaces Pavel Emelyanov
2010-09-29 21:45 ` [PATCH v3 0/9] sunrpc: Create sockets in namespaces J. Bruce Fields
2010-09-29 21:49 ` Chuck Lever
2010-09-30 5:46 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2010-09-30 15:16 ` Chuck Lever
2010-09-30 15:34 ` Pavel Emelyanov [this message]
2010-10-01 22:05 ` J. Bruce Fields
2011-07-20 21:10 ` J. Bruce Fields
2011-07-21 7:50 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2011-07-21 16:30 ` 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=4CA4ADEA.2010700@parallels.com \
--to=xemul@parallels.com \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).