[dtrace-discuss] provider proposal: NFS v4

[Adam Leventhal]

On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 06:43:07PM -0600, Spencer Shepler wrote:
> NFSv4.1 is introducing a set of new operations to inflict the
> new set of features within the protocol.  There is a mix of
> optional and mandatory to implement operations and corresponding
> args/results.  That isn't going to be a problem.  The real issues
> are that there are 4-5 operations that have been designated
> as mandatory-not-to-implement; meaning that they may appear
> as defined in the RPC language but are never to be used --
> the vestiges of NFSv4.0.  That isn't too much of a problem either.
> The larger issue is that there are a couple of arguments (OPEN mainly)
> that have been extended through the NFSv4 minor version rules
> to include additional parameters in effect.  This means that
> an NFSv4 and NFSv4.1 provider should not share the argument
> definition.  I don't see that as much of a problem either if
> the providers were per minor version (e.g. NFSv4.0 and NFSv4.1).

Will an NFSv4.1 server be able to handle requests from a 4.0 client?

Are you suggesting that there will be a probe called nfsv41:::op-open-start
which has as its argument a OPEN41args structure? It wouldn't be possible
to create some parameter which included the relevant information from either
minor version?

> In summary, the proposal is fine with me as long as we have
> an expectation that a new provider (similar in size
> and complexity) will be in place for NFSv4.1.

Yes, we're hoping that projects groups will realize the utility of DTrace
providers and implement them as a part of their project.

Adam

-- 
Adam Leventhal, FishWorks                        http://blogs.sun.com/ahl