From: James Lentini <jlentini@netapp.com>
To: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@gmail.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 10:13:57 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0704161002200.7869@jlentini-linux.nane.netapp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <170fa0d20704142040w204a715bgf5ce772e67126bbd@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On 4/13/07, Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 16:47 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > > I must be missing something because I don't see _any_ trace of the
> > > core RPC over RDMA support (xprtrdma et al), your RPC Transport
> > > Switch, or any of the other supporting changes in mainline. Could
> > > you, or others, please clarify the plan for merging RPC/RDMA?
> >
> > That would be a question for the actual RPC/RDMA developers (i.e. James
> > Lentini and Tom Talpey). They haven't submitted any code for review yet.
>
> The reason I asked is there seems to be a catch-22 going on here if
> (as Chuck indicated) the NetApp engineers are waiting for the
> remaining rpc transport switch patches to be merged. My naive
> understanding is that those remaining transport switch patches aren't
> _really_ needed without the RPC/RDMA patches.
>
> Essentially I'm echoing Or Gerlitz's post to openib-general back in December:
> http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/general/2006-December/029721.html
>
> If so, it begs the question: why the hold up from the NetApp
> engineers? In the hopes of getting some insight I've cc'd James
> Lentini and Tom Talpey.
>
> I'm assuming that all of you obviously want your code merged mainline.
> The thing that is puzzling is the non-traditional release management
> of this RPC/RDMA and NFS/RDMA code. Aside from the periodic
> announcements of the tarball updates to the sf.net nfs-rdma project;
> I've not found any posting/discussion of associated patches to the
> various mailing lists (nfs, nfsv4, ofa's general, lkml, etc).
>
> 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.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-16 14:28 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 [this message]
2007-04-16 14:48 ` Mike Snitzer
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=Pine.LNX.4.64.0704161002200.7869@jlentini-linux.nane.netapp.com \
--to=jlentini@netapp.com \
--cc=Thomas.Talpey@netapp.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.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=snitzer@gmail.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®