From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:1025 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755911Ab0H3Qx0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Aug 2010 12:53:26 -0400 Message-ID: <4C7BE1FC.2020400@RedHat.com> Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 12:53:16 -0400 From: Steve Dickson To: Jeff Layton CC: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, bfields@fieldses.org, chuck.lever@oracle.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] rpc.nfsd: mount up nfsdfs is it doesn't appear to be mounted yet References: <1282995314-8317-1-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> <4C7BD394.3030705@RedHat.com> <20100830121600.529669bd@tlielax.poochiereds.net> In-Reply-To: <20100830121600.529669bd@tlielax.poochiereds.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 On 08/30/2010 12:16 PM, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 11:51:48 -0400 > Steve Dickson wrote: > >> >> >> On 08/28/2010 07:35 AM, Jeff Layton wrote: >>> There's a bit of a chicken and egg problem when nfsd is run the first >>> time. On Fedora/RHEL at least, /proc/fs/nfsd is mounted up whenever nfsd >>> is plugged in via a modprobe.conf "install" directive. >>> >>> If someone runs rpc.nfsd without plugging in nfsd.ko first, >>> /proc/fs/nfsd won't be mounted and rpc.nfsd will end up using the legacy >>> nfsctl interface. After that, nfsd will be plugged in and subsequent >>> rpc.nfsd invocations will use that instead. >>> >>> This is a problem as some nfsd command-line options are ignored when the >>> legacy interface is used. It'll also be a problem for people who want >>> IPv6 enabled servers. The upshot is that we really don't want to use the >>> legacy interface unless there is no other option. >> Well maybe its time we stop supporting the legacy interface... I >> would rather stop supporting something nobody uses then added >> some questionable code... Lets just error out when /proc/fs/nfsd >> is not mounted and log what needs to happen... >> >> steved. >> > > Hmmm...if I had known that it was ok to stop supporting old kernels, > the IPv6 support for rpc.nfsd would have been a heck of a lot easier to > implement. I thought you said the legacy interface would not work with IPV6 or did I misunderstand you? > > I'm not sure I like throwing up our hands and bailing out with a log > message. We'll be going from an at least somewhat carefully considered > fallback mechanism to an outright failure to start in this situation. > That doesn't really seem like an improvement to me... This case will only happen when people start rpc.nfsd by hand (i.e. not via some start-up script) which %99.999 of the users do not do . But the few that do start rpc.nfsd by hand, they are probably debugging something, so logging a message saying /proc/fs/nfsd is not mount would be quite handy... IMHO... > > How this as an alternate proposal? > > We attempt to mount up nfsdfs. If the "threads" file still isn't > present after the attempt, we then log a warning and go with the > nfsctl() interface? Has anybody test this legacy interface lately?? Does anybody anybody depend on the existence of this interface??? I would guess the answer would be no to both questions... So I see this as an opportunity so simplify the code... which is always a good thing... So I would have no problem saying from the next release of nfs-utils, the legacy interface is no longer supported... especially if there are issues with IPV6. steved.