Re: [PATCH] cifs-utils: mention the required kernel version to make cifs.idmap work

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 11:59:20 -0500
> Steve French <smfrench@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 7:11 AM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 17:33:47 +0530
>> > Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >
>> >> .. properly in the "NOTES" section.
>> >>
>> >> Cc: Shirish Pargaonkar <shirishpargaonkar@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@xxxxxxx>
>> >> ---
>> >>  cifs.idmap.8.in |    3 +++
>> >>  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/cifs.idmap.8.in b/cifs.idmap.8.in
>> >> index f2fa3b2..7adfdc6 100644
>> >> --- a/cifs.idmap.8.in
>> >> +++ b/cifs.idmap.8.in
>> >> @@ -76,6 +76,9 @@ create      cifs\&.idmap     * * @sbindir@/cifs\&.idmap %k
>> >>  See
>> >>  \fBrequest-key.conf\fR(5)
>> >>  for more info on each field\&.
>> >> +.SH "NOTES"
>> >> +.PP
>> >> +For cifs.idmap to work properly you would need a kernel version 3.0 or above.
>> >>  .SH "SEE ALSO"
>> >>  .PP
>> >>
>> >
>> > This looks reasonable, but I'm always a bit leery of calling out
>> > specific versions like this. Some distros (e.g. Red Hat's and Novell's)
>> > will backport features from later kernels, so saying you need a 3.0
>> > kernel might be confusing.
>> >
>> > We might want to rephrase this with something like "Support for upcalls
>> > to cifs.idmap was initially introduced in the 3.0 kernel." It's a
>> > little more weaselly but it isn't false if someone is working with a
>> > kernel that has backported this code.
>> >
>> > Sound reasonable?
>>
>> Yes - also to supplement this data can use the cifs version (displayed
>> by modinfo) - presumably with wholesale backport of cifs code the
>> version number could be updated as well.
>>
>
> Except that often, distros pick and choose what new features to
> backport. FWIW, I typically I don't bother bumping the version number
> in the kmod in RHEL since it's more or less meaningless...
if it is a selective backport I agree - I sometimes do whole module
backport (with minor fixups for kabi changes).



-- 
Thanks,

Steve
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux