From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Warren Togami Subject: NFS why root=nfs and root=nfs4? Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:31:34 -0400 Message-ID: <4A3FF836.6080208@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Sender: initramfs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: initramfs I just realized that the following are yet another NFS syntax variation. client_test "NFSv3 root=nfs DHCP path only" 52:54:00:12:34:00 \ "root=nfs" 192.168.50.1 -wsize=4096 || return 1 client_test "NFSv3 root=nfs DHCP IP:path" 52:54:00:12:34:01 \ "root=nfs" 192.168.50.2 -wsize=4096 || return 1 client_test "NFSv4 root=nfs4 DHCP path only" 52:54:00:12:34:80 \ "root=nfs4" 192.168.50.1 -wsize=4096 || return 1 client_test "NFSv4 netroot=nfs4 DHCP IP:path" 52:54:00:12:34:81 \ "netroot=nfs4" 192.168.50.2 -wsize=4096 || return 1 client_test "NFSv4 root=nfs4 DHCP IP:path" 52:54:00:12:34:81 \ "root=nfs4" 192.168.50.2 -wsize=4096 || return 1 client_test "NFSv4 root=nfs4" 52:54:00:12:34:84 \ "root=nfs4" 192.168.50.1 -wsize=4096 || return 1 client_test "NFSv4 root=nfs4 DHCP path,options" \ 52:54:00:12:34:85 "root=nfs4" 192.168.50.1 wsize=4096 || return client_test "NFSv4 root=nfs4 DHCP IP:path,options" \ 52:54:00:12:34:86 "root=nfs4" 192.168.50.2 wsize=4096 || return When is it ever necessary to use explicitly root=nfs or root=nfs4 instead of root=dhcp? It seems functionally equivalent while unnecessarily limiting since DHCP should tell you the protocol. Benefits of de-supporting these variations: * Simplify the documentation further, fewer possible ways to configure it to confuse people. * Far fewer redundant test cases to make the test suite slow. Warren Togami wtogami-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe initramfs" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html