On 08/25/2009 02:59 PM, Chuck Lever wrote: > On Aug 25, 2009, at 1:55 PM, Steve Dickson wrote: >> commit 1471d23d692efc7388794a8a3c3b9e548d1c5be8 >> Author: Steve Dickson <steved@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Date: Tue Aug 25 12:15:18 2009 -0400 >> >> Make sure umount use correct fs type. >> >> umounts use the fs type in /etc/mtab to determine >> which file system is being unmounted. The mtab >> entry is create during the mount. To ensure the >> correct entry is create when the fs type changes >> due to the mount options, the address of the fs_type >> variable has to be passed so it can be updated. > > In general, my policy is to record the user requested mount options in > /etc/mtab, and let umount.nfs handle renegotiating as needed. For > version/transport this means that the server's configuration can change > between the mount and the umount, and the umount will still work. > > Perhaps this is not a consideration for NFSv4, but leaving the mount > options as specified by the user would save the need to update the fs > type, and would be a consistent policy for v2, v3, and v4. I think it > would be cleaner to teach umount.nfs to do the right thing with "-t nfs > -o v4" rather than rewriting the options in /etc/mtab. Since nfs4 is truly a separate/different file system from nfs in the kernel, I think we should continue making that distinction in system files like mtab and /proc/mounts.... Also note there is no '-o ' flag to umount so 'umount -t nfs -o v4' is not valid... but 'umount -t nfs' is and works on both nfs4 and nfs file systems. steved. -- 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
