On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 08:03:58PM +0000, Haynes, Tom wrote: > Do you have an issue with READ_PLUS? > > I.e., are you okay with that operation because the answer is not known beforehand? The hole vs data part of it looks reasonable. The whole ADH complex looks a little fishy to me, but I will have to dig deeper into before writing down a detailed critism. But one very obvious question already comes up: what data is supposed to be returned when a client that doesn't suport 4.2 at all are doesn't support ADHs reads a file that contains them. From a quick glance it seems a mapping from ADHs to flat blocks is possible, but such a mapping should be specified in the standard. > There was a strong consensus in the biweekly calls to merge all of the operations together into WRITE_PLUS. Do you remember any arguments for it? Also any rational for adding the plain old data write to it? -- 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
