> > The write_ports code will fail both the INET4 and INET6 transport > > creation if > > the transport returns an error when PF_INET6 is specified. Some transports > > that do not support INET6 return an error other than EAFNOSUPPORT. > > That's the real bug. Any reason the RDMA RPC transport can't return > EAFNOSUPPORT in this case? I think Tom's changelog is misleading. The problem is that the RDMA transport actually does support IPv6, but it doesn't support the IPV6ONLY option yet. So if NFS/RDMA binds to a port for IPv4, then the IPv6 bind fails because of the port collision. Implementing the IPV6ONLY option for RDMA binding is probably not feasible for 2.6.34, so the best band-aid for now seems to be Tom's patch. - R. -- Roland Dreier <rolandd@xxxxxxxxx> || For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html -- 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
