Re: [RFC] knfsd: per-client fair scheduling to prevent single-client starvation

On Wed, 03 Jun 2026, Benjamin Coddington wrote:
> On 2 Jun 2026, at 23:44, Chuck Lever wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Jun 2, 2026, at 3:53 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
> 
> >> Idle clients will get pushed back to 1 slot, active client will tend
> >> towards a "fair" share based on how comparatively busy they are.
> >>
> >> This wouldn't help for v3 of course but I don't think we need these
> >> advanced features for v3.
> >
> > Ben’s employer might disagree with that :-)
> 
> Yes - v3 is pretty important to us here.

Can you remind me why v3 is important for you?  Is it the lower
state-management overhead, or something else?
Is there some way would could improve the v4 implementation or protocol
to make it comparable to v3 for your use case?

Thanks,
NeilBrown