linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] NFSv4: Use exponential backoff delay for Ni

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 25 Apr 2013 15:42:50 +0000
From:	"Myklebust, Trond" <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>
To:	"Matt W. Benjamin" <matt@...uxbox.com>
CC:	David Wysochanski <dwysocha@...hat.com>,
	Dave Chiluk <chiluk@...onical.com>,
	"linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"bfields@...ldses.org" <bfields@...ldses.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] NFSv4: Use exponential backoff delay for Ni

It's legal, but dumb...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt W. Benjamin [mailto:matt@...uxbox.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 11:28 AM
> To: Myklebust, Trond
> Cc: David Wysochanski; Dave Chiluk; linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org; linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org; bfields@...ldses.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] NFSv4: Use exponential backoff delay for Ni
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Just to clarify, the IBM delay behavior is not legal?
> 
> Matt
> 
> ----- "Trond Myklebust" <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> > OK, then. Now all I need is actual motivation for changing the
> > existing code other than handwaving arguments about "polling is better
> > than flat waits".
> > What actual use cases are impacting us now, other than the AIX design
> > decision to force CLOSE to retry at least once before succeeding?
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Matt Benjamin
> The Linux Box
> 206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150
> Ann Arbor, MI  48104
> 
> http://linuxbox.com
> 
> tel.  734-761-4689
> fax.  734-769-8938
> cel.  734-216-5309