From: James Morris Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4][RFC] NFSv3: implement extended attribute (XATTR) protocol Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 11:39:21 +1100 (EST) Message-ID: References: <4ACB5FC0.7060307@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Trond Myklebust , "J. Bruce Fields" , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , Casey Schaufler , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Peter Staubach Return-path: Received: from tundra.namei.org ([65.99.196.166]:39889 "EHLO tundra.namei.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755970AbZJIAkZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Oct 2009 20:40:25 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4ACB5FC0.7060307@redhat.com> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 6 Oct 2009, Peter Staubach wrote: > > Three operations are implemented by the new XATTR protocol and map to > > syscalls: > > > > - GETXATTR getxattr(2) > > - LISTXTTR listxattr(2) > > - SETXATTR setxattr(2) and removexattr(2) > > > > This code passes basic testing of the above syscalls, although there are > > some areas which still need work: > > > > Is there a set of tests which are used to test this functionality? No, I just manually run a set of commands to verify basic behavior. I gather LTP would be the best place to add tests for this? > > - Interoperability with other OSs (we probably should at least > > discuss with BSD folk) > > > > It would be good to include the BSD folks, but I think that more > valuable targets would be those with volume servers that might be > encountered at customer sites. I think that we need NetApp, EMC, > perhaps Sun, providing some feedback on the protocol and semantics. Given that IETF activity is closed for v3, I wonder what the best forum would be to reach all these folk? > > - Caching of xattrs at the client > > > > This will need a closer specification for the semantics associated > with these xattrs. The need will be how to determine when to > invalidate cached xattrs. I suspect user namespace xattrs should be treated like file data wrt caching (i.e. they're fully under the control of the user). > On more bullet that I might suggest is ensuring that the protocol > is compliant with the RPC and XDR standards. Thanks, I'll check that. - James -- James Morris