From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:52248 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757202Ab2JYQ7K (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2012 12:59:10 -0400 Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 12:59:08 -0400 From: Jeff Layton To: "J. Bruce Fields" Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] nfsd: add a usermodehelper upcall for NFSv4 client ID tracking Message-ID: <20121025125908.3bf1e56e@corrin.poochiereds.net> In-Reply-To: <20121025154947.GD6846@fieldses.org> References: <1351089018-24551-1-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> <1351089018-24551-2-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> <20121024210310.GG6697@fieldses.org> <20121025073936.4a57cf24@tlielax.poochiereds.net> <20121025150608.GB6846@fieldses.org> <20121025112706.086ab02a@corrin.poochiereds.net> <20121025154947.GD6846@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:49:47 -0400 "J. Bruce Fields" wrote: > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 11:27:06AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > What disadvantages do you see in doing it the way I've proposed? > > Just a vague feeling, along the lines of: APIs can outlast > implementations, and it'll take longer to rip this out if it has to be > removed from both sides.... > > But it's just an environment variable, easy to ignore, I agree. I can > live with it. > > --b. Yep, that was the main reason I used env vars here. Userspace is free to ignore them, and the kernel is free to not supply them. -- Jeff Layton