From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [patch 00/29] SGI enhancedNFS patches Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:34:44 -0400 Message-ID: <49D30B04.900@garzik.org> References: <20090331202800.739621000@sgi.com> <20090401002306.GC26583@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" , Greg Banks , Linux NFS ML To: Greg Banks Return-path: Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:58086 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755864AbZDAGey (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Apr 2009 02:34:54 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Greg Banks wrote: > On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 11:23 AM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 07:28:00AM +1100, Greg Banks wrote: > >>> Bruce: all of these are potentially candidates for 2.6.30. >> It's probably too late for 2.6.30 (the 4.1 stuff I've promised to try to >> make a serious attempt at, but that's it). I'll publish a for-2.6.31 >> branch as soon as I can.... (But of course anything that looks like a >> bugfix I'll keep considering for 2.6.30.) > > No worries. I figured as much, but the patches really did need to be > posted this week. So, what is enhancedNFS? Does enhancedNFS comply with current RFCs, or deviate? What features does it add? Jeff