On 05/28/2014 10:23 AM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > 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. Can you make v4.2 a new file that uses the v4.1 functions? That way all the v4.2 stuff is kept together. I want to try doing something similar on the client for functions in nfs4proc.c and nfs4xdr.c. Anna > > 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
