Hey Trond,
The following changes since commit fad01e866afdbe01a1f3ec06a39c3a8b9e197014:
Linux 3.15-rc8 (2014-06-01 19:12:24 -0700)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/anna/nfs-rdma.git nfs-rdma
for you to fetch changes up to dc7e3277e118e5bfd4796dc7cb386c1162c7c647:
xprtrdma: Disconnect on registration failure (2014-06-02 14:09:00 -0400)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Allen Andrews (1):
nfs-rdma: Fix for FMR leaks
Chuck Lever (21):
xprtrdma: RPC/RDMA must invoke xprt_wake_pending_tasks() in process context
xprtrdma: Remove BOUNCEBUFFERS memory registration mode
xprtrdma: Remove MEMWINDOWS registration modes
xprtrdma: Remove REGISTER memory registration mode
xprtrdma: Fall back to MTHCAFMR when FRMR is not supported
xprtrdma: mount reports "Invalid mount option" if memreg mode not supported
xprtrdma: Simplify rpcrdma_deregister_external() synopsis
xprtrdma: Make rpcrdma_ep_destroy() return void
xprtrdma: Split the completion queue
xprtrmda: Reduce lock contention in completion handlers
xprtrmda: Reduce calls to ib_poll_cq() in completion handlers
xprtrdma: Limit work done by completion handler
xprtrdma: Reduce the number of hardway buffer allocations
xprtrdma: Ensure ia->ri_id->qp is not NULL when reconnecting
xprtrdma: Remove Tavor MTU setting
xprtrdma: Use macros for reconnection timeout constants
xprtrdma: Reset connection timeout after successful reconnect
SUNRPC: Move congestion window constants to header file
xprtrdma: Avoid deadlock when credit window is reset
xprtrdma: Remove BUG_ON() call sites
xprtrdma: Disconnect on registration failure
Shirley Ma (1):
xprtrdma: Allocate missing pagelist
Steve Wise (1):
xprtrdma: mind the device's max fast register page list depth
include/linux/sunrpc/xprt.h | 6 ++
net/sunrpc/xprt.c | 28 +++------
net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/rpc_rdma.c | 119 +++++++++++++++++---------------------
net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/transport.c | 90 ++++++++++-------------------
net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/verbs.c | 753 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/xprt_rdma.h | 17 ++++--
6 files changed, 411 insertions(+), 602 deletions(-)
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Anna Schumaker
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I pulled from Chuck's branch earlier today before sending this. He has all the date stamps set as June 2.
>
OK, this is broken and I'm not pulling. The point of asking you to
maintain the tree was to ensure that the patches get reviewed by you,
and that I have signed-off-bys etc showing that is the case.
> On 06/03/2014 12:44 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Anna Schumaker
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Hey Trond,
>>>
>>> The following changes since commit fad01e866afdbe01a1f3ec06a39c3a8b9e197014:
>>>
>>> Linux 3.15-rc8 (2014-06-01 19:12:24 -0700)
>>>
>>
>> Did you rebase these? All the commits appear to be labeled with
>> today's date, and Chuck appears as the committer for all of them.
>>
>
--
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, PrimaryData
[email protected]
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Anna Schumaker
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Hey Trond,
>
> The following changes since commit fad01e866afdbe01a1f3ec06a39c3a8b9e197014:
>
> Linux 3.15-rc8 (2014-06-01 19:12:24 -0700)
>
Did you rebase these? All the commits appear to be labeled with
today's date, and Chuck appears as the committer for all of them.
--
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, PrimaryData
[email protected]
On 06/03/2014 04:07 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> Hi Shirley,
>
> I meant that the process was broken, since I was losing the
> information about what Anna had reviewed and so the issue was how to
> fix that. I've now talked to Chuck and Anna and we've set up a model
> for how to work together in the future: the model I'd like to see is
> for Anna to publish a branch of patches that she has reviewed, with
> the signed-off-by line. That way I know that the contents are the
> exact same patches that were approved on the mailing lists.
>
> Cheers
> Trond
Nice, thanks!
Shirley
On 06/03/2014 10:53 AM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Anna Schumaker
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I pulled from Chuck's branch earlier today before sending this. He has all the date stamps set as June 2.
>>
>
> OK, this is broken and I'm not pulling. The point of asking you to
> maintain the tree was to ensure that the patches get reviewed by you,
> and that I have signed-off-bys etc showing that is the case.
Thanks Trond for checking. Where was broken? What we can help here?
>> On 06/03/2014 12:44 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Anna Schumaker
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Hey Trond,
>>>>
>>>> The following changes since commit fad01e866afdbe01a1f3ec06a39c3a8b9e197014:
>>>>
>>>> Linux 3.15-rc8 (2014-06-01 19:12:24 -0700)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Did you rebase these? All the commits appear to be labeled with
>>> today's date, and Chuck appears as the committer for all of them.
>>>
>>
Shirley
I pulled from Chuck's branch earlier today before sending this. He has all the date stamps set as June 2.
On 06/03/2014 12:44 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Anna Schumaker
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hey Trond,
>>
>> The following changes since commit fad01e866afdbe01a1f3ec06a39c3a8b9e197014:
>>
>> Linux 3.15-rc8 (2014-06-01 19:12:24 -0700)
>>
>
> Did you rebase these? All the commits appear to be labeled with
> today's date, and Chuck appears as the committer for all of them.
>
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Shirley Ma <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> On 06/03/2014 10:53 AM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Anna Schumaker
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> I pulled from Chuck's branch earlier today before sending this. He has all the date stamps set as June 2.
>>>
>>
>> OK, this is broken and I'm not pulling. The point of asking you to
>> maintain the tree was to ensure that the patches get reviewed by you,
>> and that I have signed-off-bys etc showing that is the case.
>
> Thanks Trond for checking. Where was broken? What we can help here?
Hi Shirley,
I meant that the process was broken, since I was losing the
information about what Anna had reviewed and so the issue was how to
fix that. I've now talked to Chuck and Anna and we've set up a model
for how to work together in the future: the model I'd like to see is
for Anna to publish a branch of patches that she has reviewed, with
the signed-off-by line. That way I know that the contents are the
exact same patches that were approved on the mailing lists.
Cheers
Trond
>>> On 06/03/2014 12:44 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Anna Schumaker
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Hey Trond,
>>>>>
>>>>> The following changes since commit fad01e866afdbe01a1f3ec06a39c3a8b9e197014:
>>>>>
>>>>> Linux 3.15-rc8 (2014-06-01 19:12:24 -0700)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Did you rebase these? All the commits appear to be labeled with
>>>> today's date, and Chuck appears as the committer for all of them.
>>>>
>>>
>
> Shirley
>
--
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, PrimaryData
[email protected]