Re: [NBD] patch and documentation

[Sven Köhler]

> > I believe that 1MB is good, and good enough for close future. If that
> > ever proves to be problem, we can add handshake at that point. But I
> > do not believe it will be neccessary.
>
> But, who ever said the buffer in the nbd-server had to be statically
> allocated? I have a version of nbd-server that is modified to handle any
> size request that the client side throws at it -- if the buffer is not
> large enough, it simply reallocates it.

Well, imagine that somebody develops a server implementation (well, that 
was what some friends and me did in the past few days) than it is just 
good to know, that there is a limit for the length field of the 
request-packet. If there is no limit, the server implementation has to 
be abled to answer requests of any size. That is very complicated.
For example if the server has only 64MB of memeory, and the kernel would 
be abled to send a 128MB request, how would you handle that?

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/