From: Greg Banks Subject: Re: [RFC,PATCH 5/14] knfsd: max_payload per transport Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 14:56:47 +1000 Message-ID: <20070518045647.GD5104@sgi.com> References: <20070516192306.GK9626@sgi.com> <17996.12194.801580.925774@notabene.brown> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: Thomas Talpey , Linux NFS Mailing List , Peter Leckie To: Neil Brown Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.91] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HouWK-0004zT-SU for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 17 May 2007 21:56:52 -0700 Received: from netops-testserver-3-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.28] helo=relay.sgi.com ident=[U2FsdGVkX1/3IrTtzKClsKomQVeBF3HqBvdx/ew5GE4=]) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1HouWM-0005gi-La for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 17 May 2007 21:56:55 -0700 In-Reply-To: <17996.12194.801580.925774@notabene.brown> List-Id: "Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 08:34:10PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote: > On Thursday May 17, gnb@sgi.com wrote: > > > > Make svc_max_payload() delegate to a new method in svc_sock_ops > > instead of reaching into the socket (beause later the NFS/RDMA > > transport will not even have a socket). > > > > Signed-off-by: Greg Banks > > Signed-off-by: Peter Leckie > .. > > > > +static u32 svc_tcp_max_payload(struct svc_sock *svsk) > > +{ > > + return RPCSVC_MAXPAYLOAD_TCP; > > +} > > + > > Seeing these are implementation (or protocol) defined constants, do we > really need a function call? How about a > int max_payload; > in struct svc_sock_ops?? These ones are indeed constants, as is RDMA's. > Or is it tacky to put an integer in a *_ops > structure? No tackier than putting a string name like I did, or the things done in tcp_congestion_ops or sock_request_ops. It comes down to whether you want to allow future protocols to have variable limits, and right now that seems unnecesssary. I'll change the field to an int. Greg. -- Greg Banks, R&D Software Engineer, SGI Australian Software Group. Apparently, I'm Bedevere. Which MPHG character are you? I don't speak for SGI. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs