Return-Path: Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:39477 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751845AbdHDDZp (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Aug 2017 23:25:45 -0400 From: NeilBrown To: Matt Benjamin Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 13:25:33 +1000 Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi , Chuck Lever , Linux NFS Mailing List , Jeff Layton , Abbas Naderi , Steve Dickson Subject: Re: [PATCH nfs-utils v2 05/12] getport: recognize "vsock" netid In-Reply-To: References: <20170630132120.31578-1-stefanha@redhat.com> <20170630132120.31578-6-stefanha@redhat.com> <952499A1-FBBA-4FD8-97A6-B0014FA5065D@oracle.com> <87wp7lvst9.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> <87tw2ox4st.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> <20170725100513.GA5073@stefanha-x1.localdomain> <87eft2wjfy.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> <20170727105835.GF10129@stefanha-x1.localdomain> <8760edwk4l.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> <20170803152446.GA24890@stefanha-x1.localdomain> <87tw1otjf1.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> Message-ID: <87r2wst3o2.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain On Thu, Aug 03 2017, Matt Benjamin wrote: > Hi Neil, > > On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 5:45 PM, NeilBrown wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 03 2017, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > Since the vsock address family is in the tin since 4.8, this argument > appears to be about, precisely, tying existing pieces together. No, it is about adding new, unnecessary pieces into various places. > The > ceph developers working on openstack manila did find the nfs over > vsock use case compelling. I appreciate this because it has > encouraged more interest in the cephfs community around using the > standardized NFS protocol for deployment. I'm sure the ceph developers find zero-conf NFS a compelling use case. I would be surprised if they care whether it is over vsock or IPv6. But I'm losing interest here. I'm not a gate-keeper. If you can convince Steve/Trond/Anna/Brice to accept your code, then good luck to you. I don't think a convincing case has been made though. NeilBrown > > Matt > >> >> I think we all agree that providing something that "just works" is a >> worth goal. In only question is about how much new code can be >> justified, and where it should be put. >> >> Given that almost everything you need already exists, it seems best to >> just tie those pieces together. >> >> NeilBrown >> >> >>> >>> The changes required to Linux and nfs-utils are related to the sunrpc >>> transport and configuration. They do not introduce risks to core NFS or >>> TCP/IP. I would really like to get patches merged because I currently >>> have to direct interested users to building Linux and nfs-utils from >>> source to try this out. >>> >>> Stefan --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEG8Yp69OQ2HB7X0l6Oeye3VZigbkFAlmD6S8ACgkQOeye3VZi gblQ/xAAn+EdHkxJAuuvam5nLquE1cyI30lzH10/2JU6lutB8X/50KTUuVL+RdtD Nc0PYe+kiABr2hIuU//Fp7ndRs7H0ULpit5eSH1I6jmHNlTf7mgGyKJlEkKd3lCZ Lfk8H/xZhJ95bKxIWj9eOQrkMecEtamTBOcIr1iRybzacGKer3oGVIEl1B3xtgax kgVkp5qJhUYTu1SlpPrYcxo+6R4UYXHmqADOdhVQQlZ9ys2ltbt5PenFxe7fuRHD TG3h1IWr/hzdmY/reJSDiJrCYV+dIQ/5ikS0u3/4LD+OWtfxrrnhLM/tgA9Ggb3g LqqhQY+0TpmP+02vtkW4Zf1fjSioBHxGG33HoGPLuzKwACLSfdQ+L8D7S5EsvLwU M095qOYFhZxlGj3i7hKkeW34hVv/bOfa/oUdrkDZjZfnUsEhLzSphyE/Gx44ccdX 5I6/LU4R2feSdLkVJYHNkkcKUmcO37Rp7kT4YDag5HCOBns0CbLxChDyRDkZ/QUS OHk23LX+UmhYvO6hbL2ZHkCmF47DpbODI7S6l7LodTURJ/0KdsMea71eCHYI4JMD fOPQ2Zb70RFdKrAery9lDOWVpFe5B69U0wwdrVxQ5n3KVt+DRHamd4axaYGDt5BF d8Rg7PEBScWkyTscG0Szq/8g1UgU8vNlXMVeYIOSsVx968kTFNI= =gvpT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--