From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Tom Talpey <tom-CLs1Zie5N5HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
"J. Bruce Fields"
<bfields-uC3wQj2KruNg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>,
trond.myklebust-7I+n7zu2hftEKMMhf/gKZA@public.gmane.org,
schumaker.anna-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org,
linux-nfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
Chuck Lever <chuck.lever-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] sunrpc: flag transports as using IETF approved congestion control protocols
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2017 11:03:23 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170224180323.GA22491@obsidianresearch.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1487956644.3314.4.camel-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> I'd rather rely on those attributes instead of any sort of IETF
> approval anyway. Do all RDMA transports (RoCEv2, in particular) have
> those characteristics?
The NFS-RDMA driver only works with RDMA RC transports which are
defined to provide all those characteristics.
> In any case, for now I think we should just give all RDMA transports a
> pass, and clean that up later. I'm mostly interested in excluding UDP
> over IP for now -- being more strict with RDMA can come later.
Makes sense to me. At the end of the day I think everything supported
by NFS-RDMA should be permitted to use NFSv4, and we should ignore
sketchy spec language that suggests otherwise.
Jason
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Cc: Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
trond.myklebust@primarydata.com, schumaker.anna@gmail.com,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>,
linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] sunrpc: flag transports as using IETF approved congestion control protocols
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2017 11:03:23 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170224180323.GA22491@obsidianresearch.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1487956644.3314.4.camel@redhat.com>
> I'd rather rely on those attributes instead of any sort of IETF
> approval anyway. Do all RDMA transports (RoCEv2, in particular) have
> those characteristics?
The NFS-RDMA driver only works with RDMA RC transports which are
defined to provide all those characteristics.
> In any case, for now I think we should just give all RDMA transports a
> pass, and clean that up later. I'm mostly interested in excluding UDP
> over IP for now -- being more strict with RDMA can come later.
Makes sense to me. At the end of the day I think everything supported
by NFS-RDMA should be permitted to use NFSv4, and we should ignore
sketchy spec language that suggests otherwise.
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-24 18:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-23 17:03 [PATCH 0/4] nfs/nfsd/sunrpc: enforce requirement for congestion control protocols in NFSv4 Jeff Layton
2017-02-23 17:03 ` [PATCH 1/4] sunrpc: flag transports as using IETF approved congestion control protocols Jeff Layton
2017-02-23 19:42 ` Tom Talpey
[not found] ` <2152dfdf-f847-2511-1600-6499b6ea9708-CLs1Zie5N5HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2017-02-23 20:00 ` Jeff Layton
2017-02-23 20:00 ` Jeff Layton
[not found] ` <1487880034.3448.8.camel-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2017-02-23 20:06 ` Tom Talpey
2017-02-23 20:06 ` Tom Talpey
[not found] ` <65056db6-f30a-c44d-b01c-b549887c4895-CLs1Zie5N5HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2017-02-23 20:11 ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-02-23 20:11 ` J. Bruce Fields
[not found] ` <20170223201109.GC11882-uC3wQj2KruNg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
2017-02-23 20:26 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-02-23 20:26 ` Jason Gunthorpe
[not found] ` <20170223202609.GC26301-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
2017-02-23 20:33 ` Tom Talpey
2017-02-23 20:33 ` Tom Talpey
[not found] ` <18ef37c3-95db-9a2c-dbcb-f579672065d6-CLs1Zie5N5HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2017-02-23 20:55 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-02-23 20:55 ` Jason Gunthorpe
[not found] ` <20170223205502.GA29673-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
2017-02-24 15:08 ` Tom Talpey
2017-02-24 15:08 ` Tom Talpey
[not found] ` <4eb1da3d-2690-7647-2d85-cc574bc1d564-CLs1Zie5N5HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2017-02-24 17:17 ` Jeff Layton
2017-02-24 17:17 ` Jeff Layton
[not found] ` <1487956644.3314.4.camel-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2017-02-24 18:03 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2017-02-24 18:03 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-02-23 20:32 ` Jeff Layton
2017-02-23 20:32 ` Jeff Layton
2017-02-23 20:17 ` Chuck Lever
2017-02-23 20:17 ` Chuck Lever
2017-02-23 20:15 ` Chuck Lever
2017-02-23 17:03 ` [PATCH 2/4] sunrpc: turn bitfield flags in svc_version into bools Jeff Layton
2017-02-23 17:03 ` [PATCH 3/4] nfs/nfsd/sunrpc: enforce congestion control protocol requirement for NFSv4 Jeff Layton
2017-02-23 17:03 ` [PATCH 4/4] sunrpc: don't register UDP port with rpcbind when version needs congestion control Jeff Layton
2017-02-23 17:17 ` [PATCH 0/4] nfs/nfsd/sunrpc: enforce requirement for congestion control protocols in NFSv4 Jeff Layton
2017-02-24 18:25 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] nfs/nfsd/sunrpc: enforce NFSv4 transport requirements Jeff Layton
2017-02-24 18:25 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] sunrpc: turn bitfield flags in svc_version into bools Jeff Layton
2017-02-24 18:25 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] sunrpc: flag transports as having both reliable and ordered delivery, and congestion control Jeff Layton
2017-02-24 18:25 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] nfs/nfsd/sunrpc: enforce transport requirements for NFSv4 Jeff Layton
2017-02-24 18:25 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] sunrpc: don't register UDP port with rpcbind when version needs congestion control Jeff Layton
2017-02-24 18:38 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] nfs/nfsd/sunrpc: enforce NFSv4 transport requirements Chuck Lever
2017-02-24 18:53 ` Jeff Layton
2017-02-24 21:23 ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-02-24 18:53 ` Tom Talpey
2017-02-24 21:22 ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-02-24 21:25 ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-02-24 21:34 ` Jeff Layton
2017-02-24 21:44 ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-02-27 11:59 ` Jeff Layton
2017-02-27 12:08 ` Tom Talpey
2017-02-27 12:55 ` Jeff Layton
2017-02-27 14:20 ` J. Bruce Fields
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=20170224180323.GA22491@obsidianresearch.com \
--to=jgunthorpe-epgobjl8dl3ta4ec/59zmfatqe2ktcn/@public.gmane.org \
--cc=bfields-uC3wQj2KruNg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org \
--cc=chuck.lever-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-nfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=schumaker.anna-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=tom-CLs1Zie5N5HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=trond.myklebust-7I+n7zu2hftEKMMhf/gKZA@public.gmane.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.