[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <5AC2C9F0-EEFE-423E-BBB9-27102D1CA163@oracle.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 09:30:36 -0400
From: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>
To: Jim Rees <rees@...ch.edu>
Cc: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@...il.com>,
"bfields@...ldses.org" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
"Trond.Myklebust@...app.com" <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"bharrosh@...asas.com" <bharrosh@...asas.com>,
"linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@...sung.com>,
VivekTrivedi <t.vivek@...sung.com>,
Amit Sahrawat <a.sahrawat@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] nfs: Support posix_fadvise(POSIX_FADV_RANDOM) on nfs server.
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 23, 2012, at 7:51 AM, Jim Rees <rees@...ch.edu> wrote:
> Namjae Jeon wrote:
>
> From: Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@...sung.com>
>
> This patch disable readahead for a file on NFS Server when
> posix_fadvise(fd..., POSIX_FADV_RANDOM) is called on NFS
> Client.
>
> It looks like you're adding an argument to the read op. Wouldn't that be an
> incompatible change? In which case wouldn't it be better to propose this
> for inclusion in NFS 4.2? In fact didn't Dean propose this? What ever
> happened with that?
Yes, posix_fadvise support is part of NFSv4.2.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists