[pnfs] question about getdevlist server code

[Labiaga, Ricardo]

It sounds like we should remove the "draft 13" getdevlist and getdevinfo
patches from 2.6-latest then.  You're going to rework them anyway, and
they break our files pNFS implementation.  Agreed?

- ricardo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dean hildebrand [mailto:seattleplus at gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 5:41 PM
> To: Labiaga, Ricardo
> Cc: Sager, Mike; pnfs at linux-nfs.org
> Subject: Re: [pnfs] question about getdevlist server code
> 
> On Oct 31, 2007 4:56 PM, Labiaga, Ricardo 
> <Ricardo.Labiaga at netapp.com> wrote:
> > Hi Dean,
> >
> > That's what I get for missing last week's meeting...  Are you saying
> > that by design the getdevlist code we used in Ann Arbor 
> only handles a
> > single DS?
> No, let me try to explain.
> 
> The patches we wrote to handle draft-13 of getdevlist and getdevinfo
> were minimal, but they get the job done.  We took a few shortcuts,
> such as assuming that there is only 1 deviceid for getdevlist (which
> is fine for file layout since all devices come under a single
> deviceid)
> 
> My paches that move us to the new export interface will 
> correct these shortcuts.
> 
> Sorry for the confusion, I'm sure we are all sick of the word device
> by now.....
> 
> Dean
> 
> >
> > - ricardo
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dean hildebrand [mailto:seattleplus at gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 4:53 PM
> > > To: Sager, Mike
> > > Cc: pnfs at linux-nfs.org
> > > Subject: Re: [pnfs] question about getdevlist server code
> > >
> > > The goal was to just get the server working with draft-13.
> > >
> > > The other reason we didn't spend too much time solving it for the
> > > generic case was that we decided on a new export interface for
> > > devices.    It seems there was agreement on this new 
> interface last
> > > week and I'm going to start implementing it as soon as I 
> get a chance.
> > >  Right now I'm swamped preparing for supercomputing, but 
> I will send
> > > out a patch in the next couple of weeks.
> > >
> > > Dean
> > >
> > > On Oct 31, 2007 2:33 PM, Sager, Mike 
> <Mike.Sager at netapp.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I have a question about a recent patch to the 2.6.23-based
> > > server.  When
> > > > the server is encoding the response to GETDEVLIST in
> > > > nfsd4_encode_getdevlist(), it's doing:
> > > >
> > > >        if (!nfserr) {
> > > >                RESERVE_SPACE(20 + sizeof(nfs4_verifier));
> > > >                WRITE64(gdevl->gd_cookie);
> > > >                WRITEMEM(&gdevl->gd_verf, sizeof(nfs4_verifier));
> > > >
> > > >                // num of devlist_item4
> > > >                WRITE32(1);
> > > >
> > > >                WRITE32(gdevl->gd_devlist[0].dev_id);
> > > >
> > > >                ADJUST_ARGS();
> > > >                len = nfsd4_encode_devlist_item(resp, gdevl);
> > > >
> > > >                RESERVE_SPACE(4);
> > > >                WRITE32(gdevl->gd_eof);
> > > >                ADJUST_ARGS();
> > > >                kfree(gdevl->gd_devlist);
> > > >        }
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It seems to be hardcoding the number of devices to 1.  I'm
> > > told there
> > > > was some discussion at Bakeathon about this.  Can 
> someone shed some
> > > > light on why it's doing this?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Mike
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > pNFS mailing list
> > > > pNFS at linux-nfs.org
> > > > http://linux-nfs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pnfs
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > pNFS mailing list
> > > pNFS at linux-nfs.org
> > > http://linux-nfs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pnfs
> > >
> >
>