On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 09:44:25AM -0500, Steve Dickson wrote: > > > On 12/06/2016 05:36 PM, NeilBrown wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 07 2016, Steve Dickson wrote: > > > >>> +.B nfsd > >>> +Recognized values: > >>> +.BR threads , > >>> +.BR grace-time , > >>> +.BR lease-time , > >>> +.BR udp , > >>> +.BR tcp , > >>> +.BR vers2 , > >>> +.BR vers3 , > >>> +.BR vers4 , > >>> +.BR vers4.0 , > >> Do we need both ver4 and ver4.0? > > > > "vers4" allows you to enable or disable v4 has a whole. > > The assumption is that if enabled, all minor versions that the kernel > > supports will be enabled by default. > > vers4.x allows individual minor versions to be disabled, so > > vers4=yes > > vers4.0=no > > would disable v4.0, just like "-V4 -N4.0" > I see... > > > > > I do wonder if this is ever valid though. Why do we allow minor > > versions to be enabled/disabled? > IDK... I think Trond did this... you know... > when in doubt... blame Trond! 8-) Or Benny, 8daf220a6a83 "nfsd41: control nfsv4.1 svc via /proc/fs/nfsd/versions". > > Does it make any sense to enable a non-contiguous set of minor versions? > I don't think so... Talk about handing people rope! ;-) I can't think of a reason either. > > Should we just have a maximum NFSv4 minor version? > Maybe.. If you do that then I'd allow a minimum too. --b. > > I was trying to duplicate the current functionality as closely as > > convenient. That might not be best in this case. > You did a good job... this is definitely a nit. > > 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
