On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:16:03AM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > > On Sep 30, 2010, at 1:46 AM, Pavel Emelyanov wrote: > > >>> Shall I commit this to my for-2.6.37 tree? Objections? > >> > >> I think it looks OK. > >> > >> But I was wondering if there were any other changes needed for the RDMA > >> transport capability, or had we decided that would happen at a latter point, > >> or that changes are entirely unneeded > > > > We definitely need more changes in the RDMA transport, but I would like to > > have it done later (unless someone other than me starts doing it earlier ;) ). > > OK, thanks for clearing that up. It makes sense to keep the scope of this socket patch set narrow, but I don't want the RDMA pieces to get lost. The more we let the RDMA and socket transport capabilities differ, the harder it will be to support RDMA in the long run. > > Anyway, Bruce, I have no objection to the latest version of this socket patch set, fwiw. Applied and pushed out, thanks Pavel and Chuck.... --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
