On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Chaitanya Huilgol
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Well, there was no ceph_options pointer in the messenger layer and no_crc
> flag was being passed into the messenger as an additional flag and maintained
> within the messenger again as bool no_crc, I inferred that it was intentional
> and we did not want the generic options in the messenger layer. If it is
> fine to have messenger point back to the ceph_options, then that’s the
> easiest way to do it.
> Also, we would have some additional option coming in with RDMA support (xio
> messenger) which would be very messenger specific, so having a messenger
> options had made sense.
OK, we'll see how to refactor it nicely then.
Given that tcp_nodelay is just a bool, for now I'd suggest the simplest
and least invasive patch:
- add bool tcp_nodelay field to ceph_messenger
- add bool tcp_nodelay parameter to ceph_messenger_init()
- call ceph_messenger_init() with ceph_test_opt(client, TCP_NODELAY)
Thanks,
Ilya
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
