On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 15:51:44 -0500 Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 2010-01-19 at 15:38 -0500, Jeff Layton wrote: > > On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:43:34 -0500 > > Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > I think that doesn't describe this workaround adequately. This is a > > > temporary crutch that prevents us from using IPv6 if "proto=" isn't > > > specified. The underlying problem here is that nfs_lookup() returns > > > just one address. > > > > > > > Yes. The best solution would be to somehow try all addresses in the > > list until one works. That's a larger project however and we'll > > probably need some significant kernel changes to handle that anyway. > > Why would that involve kernel changes? I'm assuming that we can just > retry the mount call if we see that the server isn't listening on a > particular ip address+port combination. > > Cheers > Trond > True, it's not required. We could just return to userspace and have it try again. I think that there might be advantages to being able to pass a list of addresses to the kernel, or overhaul the mount process to have the kernel upcall for addresses, but it's not strictly required for this. -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> -- 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
