From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 15:17:10 +0100
Subject: [NFS] [Cluster-devel] [PATCH 0/4 Revised] NLM - lock failover
In-Reply-To: <20070427134248.GB25126@salusa.poochiereds.net>
References: <17959.5245.635902.823441@notabene.brown>
	<462D79F0.4060800@redhat.com>
	<17965.39683.396108.623418@notabene.brown>
	<46302C01.2060500@redhat.com>
	<17968.15370.88587.653447@notabene.brown>
	<46315EED.9020103@redhat.com>
	<17969.37229.250000.895316@notabene.brown>
	<20070427111513.GA25126@salusa.poochiereds.net>
	<17969.61232.323762.29003@notabene.brown>
	<20070427134248.GB25126@salusa.poochiereds.net>
Message-ID: <20070427141710.GA11484@infradead.org>
List-Id: <cluster-devel.redhat.com>
To: cluster-devel.redhat.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 09:42:48AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> Ok, I'll toss cleaning that patch up and reposting it on to my to-do list...
> 
> Wendy, it seems like you had some objection to this patch at the time, but
> the nature of it escapes me. Do you recall what your concern with it was?

I like the idea of the patch.  Intead of writing a dev_t into procfs
it should probably be changed to write a path to a new file in the
nfsctl filesystem.   In fact couldn't this be treated as a reexport
with a NFSEXP_ flag meaning drop all locks to avoid creating new
interfaces?