From: Trond Myklebust Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] zerocopy NFS for 2.5.43 Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 17:49:36 +0100 Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <15806.48160.519752.117620@charged.uio.no> References: <15805.26221.530836.279218@charged.uio.no> <20021029.153629.55720711.taka@valinux.co.jp> <15806.42148.47823.817360@charged.uio.no> <20021030.012731.104039610.taka@valinux.co.jp> Reply-To: trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au, nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Return-path: Received: from pat.uio.no ([129.240.130.16]) by usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 186ZYs-0000vz-00 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 08:49:50 -0800 To: Hirokazu Takahashi In-Reply-To: <20021030.012731.104039610.taka@valinux.co.jp> Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: >>>>> " " == Hirokazu Takahashi writes: >> Unless, of course, you've got another use for the >> head_page/tail_page? > I just wanted to make it general. I guessed head_page (or > head_pages) might be usefull for big NFSv4 COMPOUND messages as > we could send a head without any copies. But it's just my > guess. It's good to know that this is possible, but lets not overdesign: we don't want to implement this unless we know that we have a need. Cheers, Trond ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs