On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 2:09 PM, Trond Myklebust <trondmy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 2018-02-23 at 13:45 -0500, Steve Dickson wrote: >> >> On 02/23/2018 12:05 PM, Olga Kornievskaia wrote: >> > On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 11:24 AM, Steve Dickson <SteveD@xxxxxxxxxx> >> > wrote: >> > > Hey Olga, >> > > >> > > On 02/22/2018 02:28 PM, Olga Kornievskaia wrote: >> > > > It is possible that userland can pass to the kernel mismatching >> > > > inputs for the minorversion. like vers=4.1,minorversion=0. >> > > > Instead >> > > > of making the kernel responposible for 'choosing' the >> > > > minorversion, >> > > > make the userland always responsible for not sending a >> > > > mismatch. >> > > >> > > I'm thinking this is probably more of mount problem... >> > >> > Yes the problem is a broken user land sending incorrect arguments >> > but >> > I still think the kernel needs to do sanity checking on arguments >> > to >> > prevent this from happening again. >> > >> > > mount -t nfs4 -o minorversion=0 server:/export /mnt >> > > >> > > shouldn't this be a v4.0 mount instead of a 4.2 mount? >> > >> > Yes I would think this should create a v4.0 mount. >> >> Way back when... there was some talk about deprecating >> minorversion= flag... Since it is broken, maybe this is >> a good time to do it? >> >> Thoughts? > > I've never liked the separate v4-only 'minorversion' keyword, which is > why I introduced the 'version=4.x' format. My preference is therefore > that we continue to deprecate use of 'minorversion' with a view to > killing it off completely. It all seems like a good idea except I wonder how widely used and relied on "minorversion" option is. Steve you might have a good idea about it. > > -- > Trond Myklebust > Linux NFS client maintainer, PrimaryData > trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- 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
