On Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 09:48:42AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Tue, 2023-08-08 at 09:24 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 09:33:23PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > > > On Tue, 08 Aug 2023, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > > > > Introduce version field to nfsd_rpc_status handler in order to help > > > > the user to maintain backward compatibility. > > > > > > I wonder if this really helps. What do I do if I see a version that I > > > don't understand? Ignore the whole file? That doesn't make for a good > > > user experience. > > > > There is no UX consideration here. A user browsing the file directly > > will not care about the version. > > > > This file is intended to be parsable by scripts and they have to > > keep up with the occasional changes in format. Scripts can handle an > > unrecogized version however they like. > > > > This is what we typically get with a made-up format that isn't .ini > > or JSON or XML. The file format isn't self-documenting. The final > > field on each row is a variable number of tokens, so it will be > > nearly impossible to simply add another field without breaking > > something. > > > > It shouldn't be a variable number of tokens per line. That's how NFSv4 COMPOUND operations are displayed. For example: 0x5d58666f 0x000000d1 0x000186a3 NFSv4 COMPOUND 0000062034739371 192.168.103.67 0 192.168.103.56 20049 OP_SEQUENCE OP_PUTFH OP_READ The list of operations in the displayed compound are currently blank-separated tokens at the end of each row. > If there is, then that's a bug, IMO. We do want it to be simple to > just add a new field, published version info notwithstanding. They could be wrapped in curly braces, or separated by commas, to make them all one token. I haven't looked at NFSv3 output yet, but I expect those extra tokens won't even be there in that case. JSON, yaml, or xml would all address the extensibility problem, just as an alternative thought. -- Chuck Lever
