Re: [PATCH] mount.cifs: don't send a mandatory ver= option to the kernel

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

 



On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 May 2012 12:03:26 -0500
> Steve French <smfrench@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Sachin Prabhu <sprabhu@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 15:03 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
>> >> Traditionally, this ver= option was used to specify the "options
>> >> version" that we're passing in. It has always been set to '1' though
>> >> and we have never changed that.
>> >>
>> >> Eventually we want to have a ver= (or vers=) option that allows users
>> >> to specify the SMB version that they want to use to talk to the server.
>> >>
>> >> At that point, this option will just get in the way. Let's go ahead
>> >> and remove it now in preparation for that day.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Do we need 'ver=' mount option to specify the SMB version number? Isn't
>> > 'vers=' sufficient for this?
>>
>> Yes - "vers" is sufficient (although I am fine with adding synonyms to
>> make it easier for nfs users - e.g. "smbvers=" or if we want to have
>> smb2 specific utility programs (e.g. for a phone or tablet) that call
>> do_mount automatically set vers=2.1.
...
> Yes, I don't think we're going to use ver= as a synonym for vers=.
>
> That said, we haven't needed a way for the kernel to recognize the
> userspace "options version" and no other userspace mount helper that
> I'm aware of has such a thing. After all, a userspace mount helper
> isn't even required...someone can mount cifs just fine w/o one as long
> as they pass in ip=.
>
> Handling an options version is more of a problem with binary mount
> options, where you need to know if you're breaking the ABI. With text
> based options, it's just not an issue.
>
> So I think going ahead and getting rid of this in the kernel is the
> right thing to do. It's just useless cruft that may get in the way in
> the future.
>
> If the kernel ever needs to determine the mount helper "version" for
> some reason, then it can treat a lack of ver= at all identically to how
> it handles a helper that passes in ver=1.

The main case I can think of is debugging - there were a few times
that I have wanted to know the mount.cifs version in looking at dmesg
output of mount failures.   On a normal linux distro you can go to the
package manager or simply go to bash and type mount.cifs -V that isn't
as practical on a phone or on some Linux tablets.

-- 
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