Hi Trond- On Oct 20, 2014, at 3:40 PM, Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Why aren't we doing the callbacks via RDMA as per the recommendation > in RFC5667 section 5.1? There’s no benefit to it. With a side car, the server requires few or no changes. There are no CB operations that benefit from using RDMA. It’s very quick to implement, re-using most of the client backchannel implementation that already exists. I’ve discussed this with an author of RFC 5667 [cc’d], and also with the implementors of an existing NFSv4.1 server that supports RDMA. They both agree that a side car is an acceptable, or even a preferable, way to approach backchannel support. Also, when I discussed this with you months ago, you also felt that a side car was better than adding backchannel support to the xprtrdma transport. I took this approach only because you OK’d it. But I don’t see an explicit recommendation in section 5.1. Which text are you referring to? -- Chuck Lever chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com -- 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
