From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] SUNRPC: rcbind clients virtualization Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 18:10:45 -0400 Message-ID: <20111104221045.GL721@fieldses.org> References: <20111027180824.20459.23219.stgit@localhost6.localdomain6> <20111027202514.GA31669@fieldses.org> <4EAA74DD.3070708@parallels.com> <20111028093036.GA2604@fieldses.org> <4EAA78DD.2000408@parallels.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: "Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com" , "linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" , Pavel Emelianov , "neilb@suse.de" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "davem@davemloft.net" , "devel@openvz.org" To: Stanislav Kinsbursky Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4EAA78DD.2000408@parallels.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 01:41:49PM +0400, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote: > 28.10.2011 13:30, J. Bruce Fields =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82: > >On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 01:24:45PM +0400, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote= : > >>This patch-set was created before you've sent your NFSd plan and we > >>disacussed Lockd per netns. > >>So, this sentence: "NFSd service will be per netns too from my pow" > >>is obsolete. And Lockd will be one for all. > > > >I believe lockd should be pert-netns--at least that's what the serve= r > >needs. > > > >(The single lockd thread may handle requests from all netns, but it > >should behave like a different service depending on netns, so its da= ta > >structures, etc. will need to be per-ns. > > >=20 > Sure. Looks like we have misunderstanding here. When I said, that > Lockd should be one for all, I meaned, that we will have only one > kthread for all ns (not one per ns). Private data will be per net > ns, of course. >=20 > BTW, Bruce, please, have a brief look at my e-mail to > linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org named "SUNRPC: non-exclusive pipe > creation". > I've done a lot in "RPC pipefs per net ns" task, and going to send > first patches soon. But right now I'm really confused will this > non-exclusive pipes creation and almost ready so remove this > functionality. But I'm afraid, that I've missed something. Would be > greatly appreciate for your opinion about my question. Sorry for the delay--it looks reasonable to me on a quick skim, but I'm assuming it's Trond that will need to review this. --b. >=20 > >--b. > > > >>Or you are asking about something else? > >> > >>>--b. > >>> > >>>>And also we have NFSd file system, which > >>>>is not virtualized yet. > >>>> > >>>>The following series consists of: > >>>> > >>>>--- > >>>> > >>>>Stanislav Kinsbursky (3): > >>>> SUNRPC: move rpcbind internals to sunrpc part of network n= amespace context > >>>> SUNRPC: optimize net_ns dereferencing in rpcbind creation = calls > >>>> SUNRPC: optimize net_ns dereferencing in rpcbind registeri= ng calls > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> net/sunrpc/netns.h | 5 ++ > >>>> net/sunrpc/rpcb_clnt.c | 103 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------= --------------- > >>>> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>>-- > >>>>Signature > >> > >> > >>-- > >>Best regards, > >>Stanislav Kinsbursky >=20 >=20 > --=20 > Best regards, > Stanislav Kinsbursky