On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Tom Talpey <tom@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 11/23/2015 8:09 PM, Chuck Lever wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 23, 2015, at 7:39 PM, Tom Talpey <tom@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 11/23/2015 5:20 PM, Chuck Lever wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Extra resources for handling backchannel requests have to be
>>>> pre-allocated when a transport instance is created. Set a limit.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> include/linux/sunrpc/svc_rdma.h | 5 +++++
>>>> net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/svc_rdma_transport.c | 6 +++++-
>>>> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/sunrpc/svc_rdma.h
>>>> b/include/linux/sunrpc/svc_rdma.h
>>>> index f869807..478aa30 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/sunrpc/svc_rdma.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/sunrpc/svc_rdma.h
>>>> @@ -178,6 +178,11 @@ struct svcxprt_rdma {
>>>> #define RPCRDMA_SQ_DEPTH_MULT 8
>>>> #define RPCRDMA_MAX_REQUESTS 32
>>>> #define RPCRDMA_MAX_REQ_SIZE 4096
>>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_SUNRPC_BACKCHANNEL)
>>>
>>>
>>> Why is this a config option? Why wouldn't you always want
>>> this? It's needed for any post-1990 NFS dialect.
>>
>>
>> I think some distros want to be able to compile out NFSv4.x
>> on small systems, and take all the backchannel cruft with it.
>
>
> So shouldn't it follow the NFSv4.x config options then?
It does. Why the question?
--
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
