Chuck Lever wrote: > On Nov 3, 2009, at 10:28 AM, Peter Staubach wrote: >> Olaf Kirch wrote: >>> On Tuesday 03 November 2009 10:13:27 Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: >>>> I don't understand the reasoning behind .vs_hidden for NFS_ACL, >>>> hopefully >>>> Olaf can clarify. NFS_ACL is the only user of .vs_hidden as far as I >>>> can >>>> see though, so if this is changeg, shouldn't the entire commit bc5fea4 >>>> which introduced the flag be reverted? >>> >>> I can't remember the details of that one. I do remember that this is >>> based on someone's request who told me that we shouldn't register nfsacl >>> with portmap. I didn't check myself whether Solaris did or did not do >>> it at that time. >>> >>> I have no issue with reverting that change, and removing the whole >>> .vs_hidden kludge too. >>> >> >> It seems that vs_hidden is used in 1 place outside of the NFS_ACL >> server code. It is used in the NFSv4 callback code. >> >> I will look to see how difficult that might be to fix this spot >> as well and then get rid of vs_hidden. > > See archive of this mailing list from earlier in October. This change > was added because it's hard to get rid of the svc_unregister() call done > by svc_create(). > > I have another solution for that problem that I'm preparing for 2.6.33. > Cool. In the meantime, can we get this one in, Bruce? Thanx... ps -- 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
