Re: [PATCH] NFSv4: Use exponential backoff delay for Ni

[Matt W. Benjamin]

Hi,

Just to clarify, the IBM delay behavior is not legal?

Matt

- "Trond Myklebust"  wrote:

> 
> OK, then. Now all I need is actual motivation for changing the
> existing
> code other than handwaving arguments about "polling is better than
> flat
> waits".
> What actual use cases are impacting us now, other than the AIX design
> decision to force CLOSE to retry at least once before succeeding?
> 


-- 
Matt Benjamin
The Linux Box
206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150
Ann Arbor, MI  48104

http://linuxbox.com

tel.  734-761-4689 
fax.  734-769-8938 
cel.  734-216-5309 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: OFD ("file private") locks and NFS

[Matt W. Benjamin]

Hi Jeff,

Something which came up on the last Ganesha conn call is that we have
a pretty strong need for some ability to wait on a set of locks, and perhaps
receive events.  Frank Filz believed that you had made a proposal which
would cover this.  Can you elaborate on that?

Thanks,

Matt

- "Jeff Layton"  wrote:

> 
> If we really find later that we need to do something like this, I
> think
> we'd be better off adding a new set of cmd values along with the
> "extended" struct, or possibly a new syscall. Some of the samba folks
> were interested in an async locking mechanism too, so something like
> that could be added in conjunction with such an interface.
> 


-- 
Matt Benjamin
The Linux Box
206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150
Ann Arbor, MI  48104

http://linuxbox.com

tel.  734-761-4689 
fax.  734-769-8938 
cel.  734-216-5309 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/