Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from aa.linuxbox.com ([69.128.83.226]:3052 "EHLO aa.linuxbox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756119Ab3DYP2h (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Apr 2013 11:28:37 -0400 Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 11:28:21 -0400 (EDT) From: "Matt W. Benjamin" To: Trond Myklebust Cc: David Wysochanski , Dave Chiluk , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bfields@fieldses.org Message-ID: <916743278.65.1366903701195.JavaMail.root@thunderbeast.private.linuxbox.com> In-Reply-To: <1366899034.6812.4.camel@leira.trondhjem.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] NFSv4: Use exponential backoff delay for Ni MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi, Just to clarify, the IBM delay behavior is not legal? Matt ----- "Trond Myklebust" wrote: > > OK, then. Now all I need is actual motivation for changing the > existing > code other than handwaving arguments about "polling is better than > flat > waits". > What actual use cases are impacting us now, other than the AIX design > decision to force CLOSE to retry at least once before succeeding? > -- Matt Benjamin The Linux Box 206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150 Ann Arbor, MI 48104 http://linuxbox.com tel. 734-761-4689 fax. 734-769-8938 cel. 734-216-5309