From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E39CA1B949 for ; Sat, 6 Jul 2024 06:02:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720245740; cv=none; b=QCT7w75A4gDD+Yy9TObttHIBO0j/Xl2Jv68wF7DibcesFfwOu0o0Il5gVIheMIgEmynoHZ6zl64Iq8+W2PVWSceX0430YfmkKtdGpIg/iIIl3TaDjSkCbE4c9z0tm1Fj4dFMxJPUFWdJSoGNzvIw8lUAwHrlir/budnBK6Te27Q= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720245740; c=relaxed/simple; bh=fZQKZ6OHsx8OilDmBNfjxYFiKqy9pzecblcpyH8rgRg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Oz+rz3aUC7fPJNq8ZqlSapAYMWVGA+PVlkpWHQ8MpIxH05gWqTZXcsU8heDv1S0XGiBXHWy+Rcsuwj6U21M+jIJX/hGwnf398kfEyOKtJISxM6RpWPyMub6VaIWBvD00ueAYziLUF74Ne3LWVtGnWiiBwTMd6djumb1HsmOIs14= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=gNwxpO/a; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="gNwxpO/a" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=WJkO/OsiCg+4bzFAzZZzecO9p2d5bGmUtjOeO79wcqQ=; b=gNwxpO/aQ0cgjXiJcV6wxs8Y+d +vyot1iLi7WkbueJ7SSGgrd4OcsbzYxIpXAZuiNHOxGBj3/NUn0p/yT9UgfiBs6Pp/1XBzlhz00jX vfPWhdKPGKp6wrdGaW5RnU4mUTm+S5VDH+h7Kt8sJ2V0HGLlmIuic3U1Xm5pl0GbKJnVZyNb4I/bT 4HJ7XQbg8q43zcF1CIcJ3r4E1i+MZrQqOVoOcyF/8TW5jFUYqok2AlaCEaTKZAwgzDMjVlOe0jNOW fzhZ/WNc/IGG3Y3GDgSCPSOoaA/jO2LkUuF/b7gpvBNp4TIqHEYPAtu1CB3ovjBwvtYWK7MEyvkgY q/52EH1w==; Received: from hch by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sPyUz-0000000HO6V-2ssB; Sat, 06 Jul 2024 06:02:17 +0000 Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2024 23:02:17 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: NeilBrown Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Mike Snitzer , Jeff Layton , Chuck Lever III , Linux NFS Mailing List , Anna Schumaker , Trond Myklebust , Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 00/20] nfs/nfsd: add support for localio Message-ID: References: <> <172021728732.11489.12447081357748108934@noble.neil.brown.name> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <172021728732.11489.12447081357748108934@noble.neil.brown.name> X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html On Sat, Jul 06, 2024 at 08:08:07AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > I would like to see a good explanation for why NOT NFSv3. > I don't think NFSv3 is obsolete. The first dictionary is "No longer in > use." which certainly doesn't apply. > I think "deprecated" is a more relevant term. I believe that NFSv2 has > been deprecated. I believe that NFSv4.0 should be deprecated. But I > don't see any reason to consider NFSv3 to be deprecated. The obvious answer is that NFSv4.1/2 (which is really the same thing) is the only version of NFS under development and open for new features at the protocol level. So from the standardization perspective NFSv3 is obsolete. But the more important point is that NFSv4 has a built-in way to bypass the server for I/O namely pNFS. And bypassing the server by directly going to a local file system is the text book example for what pNFS does. So we'll need a really good argument why we need to reinvented a different scheme for bypassing the server for I/O. Maybe there is a really good killer argument for doing that, but it needs to be clearly stated and defended instead of assumed.