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

On 4 Jun 2026, at 17:16, NeilBrown wrote:

> 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?

Flexfiles uses v3 in its data plane, and..

> Is there some way would could improve the v4 implementation or protocol
> to make it comparable to v3 for your use case?

I don't think so - the stateless nature of v3 gives it distinct advantages
(and disadvantages) over v4 for some use cases.  That property can't be
added to v4.

Also, because knfsd doesn't have different resource pools for each version
we're going to want to continue to balance the pool for all versions
exported.

Ben