From: Warren Togami <wtogami-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
To: initramfs <initramfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: NFS why root=nfs and root=nfs4?
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:31:34 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A3FF836.6080208@redhat.com> (raw)
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
next reply other threads:[~2009-06-22 21:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-22 21:31 Warren Togami [this message]
[not found] ` <4A3FF836.6080208-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-22 22:41 ` NFS why root=nfs and root=nfs4? David Dillow
[not found] ` <1245710475.13352.31.camel-1q1vX8mYZiGLUyTwlgNVppKKF0rrzTr+@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-23 1:16 ` Warren Togami
[not found] ` <4A402CEF.4030506-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-23 3:48 ` David Dillow
[not found] ` <1245728880.13352.106.camel-1q1vX8mYZiGLUyTwlgNVppKKF0rrzTr+@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-23 4:07 ` Warren Togami
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4A3FF836.6080208@redhat.com \
--to=wtogami-h+wxahxf7alqt0dzr+alfa@public.gmane.org \
--cc=initramfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox