From: "Mike Snitzer" <snitzer@gmail.com>
To: "James Lentini" <jlentini@netapp.com>
Cc: "Trond Myklebust" <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>,
chuck.lever@oracle.com, NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@osdl.org>,
"Roland Dreier" <rdreier@cisco.com>,
nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Tom Tucker" <tom@opengridcomputing.com>,
Thomas.Talpey@netapp.com, "Or Gerlitz" <ogerlitz@voltaire.com>
Subject: Re: [NFS] Merge plans for RPC/RDMA? (Was: Re: [PATCH 000 of 14] knfsd: Preparation for IPv6 support in NFS server.)
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 10:48:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <170fa0d20704160748m60503365q5be2beba591a9f@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0704161002200.7869@jlentini-linux.nane.netapp.com>
On 4/16/07, James Lentini <jlentini@netapp.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 14 Apr 2007, Mike Snitzer wrote:
>
> > I'm interested in understanding why the reluctance to push for a merge
> > now (let alone some months ago) given the various successes that have
> > been seen with the NFS/RDMA effort (Sandia, SC '06, as Chuck noted:
> > good performance at various test sites). If the code is holding up
> > well why the delay in review and merging? And rather than wait for
> > the remaining transport switch patches; why not look to merge all of
> > NFS/RDMA (client) work at the same time?
>
> There is no reluctance to submit the NFS-RDMA code for review. There
> have been several upstream changes to the NFS server recently. We
> (NetApp and Tom Tucker at OGC) are working on a new patchset for
> NFS-RDMA that is compatible with these changes. We are testing the
> code now.
>
> We will post the patches for review when we finish updating them.
Thanks for the clarification. It was unfair of me to imply any amount
of "reluctance" to submit the NFS/RDMA code for review. I was just
trying to gauge the "real soon now" type posts we've seen over the
past few months. If anything I'd imagine the latest NFS churn has
given you additional incentive to merge.
Thanks for your continued hard work; NFS/RDMA looks to be a huge
improvement for modern NFS deployments.
regards,
Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-16 14:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-13 20:47 Merge plans for RPC/RDMA? (Was: Re: [NFS] " Mike Snitzer
2007-04-13 22:14 ` [NFS] Merge plans for RPC/RDMA? (Was: " Trond Myklebust
2007-04-15 3:40 ` Mike Snitzer
2007-04-16 14:13 ` James Lentini
2007-04-16 14:48 ` Mike Snitzer [this message]
2007-04-13 22:45 ` Merge plans for RPC/RDMA? (Was: Re: [NFS] " Chuck Lever
2007-04-14 0:04 ` Mike Snitzer
2007-04-14 1:07 ` Chuck Lever
2007-04-14 1:14 ` 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=170fa0d20704160748m60503365q5be2beba591a9f@mail.gmail.com \
--to=snitzer@gmail.com \
--cc=Thomas.Talpey@netapp.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=jlentini@netapp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=nfs@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=ogerlitz@voltaire.com \
--cc=rdreier@cisco.com \
--cc=tom@opengridcomputing.com \
--cc=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®