On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 3:39 PM, Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Yan, Zheng <ukernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 9:51 PM, Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> We are the client, but advertise keepalive2 anyway - for consistency, >>> if nothing else. In the future the server might want to know whether >>> its clients support keepalive2. >> >> the kernel code still does fully support KEEPALIVE2 (it does not >> recognize CEPH_MSGR_TAG_KEEPALIVE2 tag). I think it's better to not >> advertise support for keepalive2. > > I guess by "does not recognize" you mean the kernel client knows how to > write TAG_KEEPALIVE2, but not how to read it? The same is true about > TAG_KEEPALIVE tag and the reverse (we can read, but can't write) is > true about TAG_KEEPALIVE2_ACK. > > What I'm getting at is the kernel client is the client, and so it > doesn't need to know how to read keepalive bytes or write keepalive > acks. The server however might want to know if its clients can send > keepalive2 bytes and handle keepalive2 acks. Does this make sense? > Ok, it makes sense. thank you for explaination Reviewed-by: Yan, Zheng <zyan@xxxxxxxxxx> > Thanks, > > Ilya -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
