On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Steve Dickson <SteveD@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> On 07/06/2015 11:19 AM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Steve Dickson <steved@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> When the mountversion option is used, there should
>>> not be any mount negotiations with the server.
>>>
>>> Also, when the option is used, its know that the mount
>>> is a v4 mount and a V_SPECFIC type.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Steve Dickson <steved@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> utils/mount/network.c | 7 ++++++-
>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/utils/mount/network.c b/utils/mount/network.c
>>> index b5ed850..ebc39d3 100644
>>> --- a/utils/mount/network.c
>>> +++ b/utils/mount/network.c
>>> @@ -92,6 +92,7 @@ static const char *nfs_version_opttbl[] = {
>>> "v4",
>>> "vers",
>>> "nfsvers",
>>> + "minorversion",
>>> NULL,
>>> };
>>>
>>> @@ -1272,7 +1273,11 @@ nfs_nfs_version(struct mount_options *options, struct nfs_version *version)
>>> if (!(version->major = strtol(version_val, &cptr, 10)))
>>> goto ret_error;
>>>
>>> - if (version->major < 4)
>>> + if (strcmp(nfs_version_opttbl[i], "minorversion") == 0) {
>>> + version->v_mode = V_SPECIFIC;
>>> + version->minor = version->major;
>>> + version->major = 4;
>>> + } else if (version->major < 4)
>>> version->v_mode = V_SPECIFIC;
>>>
>>> if (*cptr == '.') {
>>>
>>
>> Doesn't this cause a dependency on the ordering of 'nfsvers'/'vers'
>> and 'minorversion' in your mount options string?
> I don't think so... The only combination that does not work
> is -o nfsvers=3,minorversion=1 which should fail...
>
> What am I missing?
>
Does "-o minorversion=1,nfsvers=3" show the same behaviour?
Cheers
Trond
--
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
