On 09/07/2010 12:25 PM, Chuck Lever wrote: > Steve- > > This series is entirely untested, and is meant to be only an example > of how we could handle "proto=rdma" and "rdma" in mount.nfs. > > The last patch in the series may not work at all. It depends on the > kernel returning EPROTONOSUPPORT for "vers=4,rdma". > > --- > > Chuck Lever (4): > mount.nfs: Prepare way for "vers=4,rdma" mounts > mount.nfs: Support an "rdma" mount option > mount.nfs: Use nfs_nfs_protocol() for checking for proto=rdma > getport: Recognize "rdma" and "rdma6" netid > > > support/include/nfsrpc.h | 6 ++++++ > support/nfs/getport.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > utils/mount/network.c | 9 +++++++-- > utils/mount/nfs.man | 11 ++++++++++- > utils/mount/stropts.c | 16 ++++++++-------- > 5 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > With all due respect... NACK.... Here is why... 1) RDMA is not a network protocol and as I found out this weekend it *never* be one, so I see absolutely no reason to treat RDMA like something it will never be. So using nfs_nfs_protocol() is incorrect. 2) Instead of modifying a couple if statements you are now making it a two step process to handle RDMA mount, which is not simpler. 3) Due to potential problems with callback with v4 the default version needs to be v3. But I do feel allowing the version to be set on the command line should work.... One thing that has become very apparent to me is, RDMA is not a network protocol and its not even a well defined netid. RDMA a special case (to use your words) so that is they way we should treated.. I will merge your man page changes as well as the comments I promised and repost the simpler, one routine patch... 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
