On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:13:09AM -0400, Anna Schumaker wrote: > On 05/28/2014 10:01 AM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 01:09:45AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > >> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 03:32:16PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > >>> Later patches handle those "exotic compounds", this one just makes > >>> sure zero-copy is turned off in those cases. > >> How did you test these exotic compounds? > > I have is a pynfs test that sends a compound with multiple reads in > > it. > > > > I don't think that's pushed out to my regular pynfs tree, I'll try > > to do that today. > > > > I could really use more of those. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm worried > > less about this case than the more finicky out-of-reply-space cases, > > where I do have patches puporting to fix problems that I haven't > > really verified. > > I'll eventually be using this case for READ_PLUS. I'll be sure to > send problems your way! :) Great, thanks. Actually my main question there is how to handle 4.2 in pynfs. 4.1 and 4.0 are entirely separate codebases. We definitely don't want to do that again. There's not much point re-running all the 4.1 tests over 4.2. Maybe all we may need is to say "use minor version 2 on this compound" in tests of the new features. But I haven't even tried to figure out how to tell pynfs about the new .x files. --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
