Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from fieldses.org ([174.143.236.118]:47615 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750980AbaDZQnh (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Apr 2014 12:43:37 -0400 Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 12:43:36 -0400 From: "J. Bruce Fields" To: Chuck Lever Cc: Steve Wise , Linux NFS Mailing List , linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, tom@ogc.us Subject: Re: [PATCH] svcrdma: refactor marshalling logic Message-ID: <20140426164336.GA11272@fieldses.org> References: <20140410183723.29724.18665.stgit@build.ogc.int> <20140425105838.GE22295@fieldses.org> <6B12FA09-0E8C-497A-9145-E2B7CAB16C53@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 In-Reply-To: <6B12FA09-0E8C-497A-9145-E2B7CAB16C53@oracle.com> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 09:24:47AM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > Hi Bruce- > > On Apr 25, 2014, at 6:58 AM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 01:37:23PM -0500, Steve Wise wrote: > >> From: Tom Tucker > >> > >> This patch refactors the marshalling logic to remove the intermediary > >> map structures. It also fixes an existing bug where the NFSRDMA server > >> was not minding the device fast register page list length limitations. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Tom Tucker > >> --- > >> > >> include/linux/sunrpc/svc_rdma.h | 3 > >> net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/svc_rdma_recvfrom.c | 551 +++++++++--------------------- > >> net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/svc_rdma_sendto.c | 230 +------------ > >> net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/svc_rdma_transport.c | 57 ++- > >> 4 files changed, 222 insertions(+), 619 deletions(-) > > > > Is it possible to make this change in more than one step? > > > > RDMA is pretty esoteric to most of us, so honestly this will probably > > get merged based just on your having tested it, but if it was possible > > to break this up into smaller patches you might give us at least a > > fighting chance of giving it some review…. > > I agree it could be broken up. > > However, my testing revealed that the patch inadvertently breaks support > for HCAs that do not support FRMR. I’ve reported this to Steve and Tom. > IMO you should wait for a newer version of the refactoring patch. Great, thanks, I'll wait. > There are plenty of people who can review and test these patches. We are > working on setting up regular testing in a broad array of environments. > > In general it would be best for maintainers not to merge NFS/RDMA patches > at least until you see Tested-by and/or Reviewed-by on the mailing > list. (which note this had). > I > also thought it was appropriate to mail patches To: you when they are ready > to be merged, but To: the mailing lists when asking for review. Will that > be a problem? It'd be clearer to add an [RFC ...] or say clearly in the email that it's not meant to be applied yet. --b.