On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 4:35 PM, J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 12:43:50PM -0400, Olga Kornievskaia wrote:
>> These structures are needed by COPY_NOTIFY on the client and needed
>> by the nfsd as well
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Olga Kornievskaia <kolga@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> include/linux/nfs4.h | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/nfs4.h b/include/linux/nfs4.h
>> index 7262908..4179c78 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/nfs4.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/nfs4.h
>> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
>> #include <linux/list.h>
>> #include <linux/uidgid.h>
>> #include <uapi/linux/nfs4.h>
>> +#include <linux/sunrpc/msg_prot.h>
>>
>> enum nfs4_acl_whotype {
>> NFS4_ACL_WHO_NAMED = 0,
>> @@ -659,4 +660,36 @@ struct nfs4_op_map {
>> } u;
>> };
>>
>> +struct nfs42_netaddr {
>> + unsigned int na_netid_len;
>> + char na_netid[RPCBIND_MAXNETIDLEN + 1];
>> + unsigned int na_uaddr_len;
>> + char na_uaddr[RPCBIND_MAXUADDRLEN + 1];
>> +};
>> +
>> +enum netloc_type4 {
>> + NL4_NAME = 1,
>> + NL4_URL = 2,
>> + NL4_NETADDR = 3,
>> +};
>> +
>> +struct nl4_server {
>> + enum netloc_type4 nl4_type;
>> + union {
>> + struct { /* NL4_NAME, NL4_URL */
>> + int nl4_str_sz;
>> + char nl4_str[NFS4_OPAQUE_LIMIT + 1];
>> + };
>> + struct nfs42_netaddr nl4_addr; /* NL4_NETADDR */
>> + } u;
>> +};
>> +
>> +/* support 1 nl4_server for now */
>> +#define NFS42_MAX_SSC_SRC 1
>
> In that case, let's just build that assumption into the data structures
> and embed struct nl4_server in nl4_servers and drop the unnecessary
> kmalloc()s.
Wouldn't we still want to malloc as the structure is too big to be
allocated on the stack?
Anna has also suggested dropping nl4_servers since the code sets maximum to 1.
I have resisted making the change because I felt like it was easier to
increase the
MAX_SSC_SRC to say something like 10 and support a multi-home server. Then
the destination server can add smarts to chose between the available address to
connect to the source server with.
Is this not a good argument to keep the structures? Should I change
value to 2 to
indicate desire to support multi-path?
>
> --b.
>
>> +
>> +struct nl4_servers {
>> + int nl_nsvr;
>> + struct nl4_server *nl_svr;
>> +};
>> +
>> #endif
>> --
>> 1.8.3.1
>>
>> --
>> 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
> --
> 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
--
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
