On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 9:50 AM, Wendy Cheng <s.wendy.cheng@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > It might be even better if it would exit if -n is used when > > no such interface is actually available. As I did it, it still > > gambles here just as before. > > > Yep, understood. Linux NFS server failover was one of my painful projects > (actually it was "the" one - so much work and so little result). Heh > But the flow you proposed confuses me. Reading the code right now (to > refresh my memory).. Will get back to the list soon. Patch no.1 was better imho.. To be frank, given that it has to be done this way I would probably make it even more intrusive by having 'clean looking' socket pool. Not that it matters much in real life terms as there are only two sockets, but at least it would look more readable.. -- // Janne -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
