linux-nfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
To: Steve Dickson <SteveD@RedHat.com>,
	Linux NFS Mailing list <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mount.nfs: v4 mounts should fail when -o flag is used.
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2017 10:27:53 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87h900eely.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <10eb706b-2f8b-24ad-d572-eb38abdb331d@RedHat.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1300 bytes --]

On Wed, May 31 2017, Steve Dickson wrote:

> Sorry for the delayed response... that damn 
> flux capacitor broke... again! ;-) 

That's what you get for buying it on e-bay??


>> 
>> According to the extra comments you have added for the modes:
>> 
>>>>> +	V_GENERAL,     /* single digit => 4 */
>>>>> +	V_SPECIFIC,    /* single digit < 4 or decimal included */
>> 
>> And it seems to me that "v4" should be V_GENERAL, not V_SPECIFIC.
>> So I think the current code is correct.
> Personally I don't see a needed for V_GENERAL v_mode type
> I guess it has to do with the specifying minor version or not
> but if any thing is specified on the command line or 
> nfsmount.conf then it is V_SPECIFIC... IMHO.

Maybe V_GENERAL should be V_MAJOR or V_SPECIFIC_MAJOR.
The v4 code assumes that if V_SPECIFIC is set, then
the version option provided to the mount command
can be passed unchanged to the kernel.
So it sometimes means V_NO_NEGOTIATE.

>> I haven't even compile-tested of course :-)
> I have and it does compile and work... Would you
> mind reposting the patch in the proper format?
> You can added Tested-by: Steve Dickson <steved@redhat.com>

Done.

>
> Note: The second patch should probably use V_GENERAL as well.

Yes, definitely.

Thanks,
NeilBrown

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]

      parent reply	other threads:[~2017-06-01  0:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-05-19 22:25 [PATCH 1/2] mount.nfs: v4 mounts should fail when -o flag is used Steve Dickson
2017-05-19 22:25 ` [PATCH 2/2] mount.nfs: v4 mounts should fail when nfs4 is specified with -t flag Steve Dickson
2017-05-22  3:03 ` [PATCH 1/2] mount.nfs: v4 mounts should fail when -o flag is used NeilBrown
2017-05-22 14:30   ` Steve Dickson
2017-05-23  0:52     ` NeilBrown
2017-05-31 15:33       ` Steve Dickson
2017-06-01  0:22         ` [PATCH] mount.nfs: improve version negotiation when vers=4 is specified NeilBrown
2017-06-01 14:02           ` Steve Dickson
2017-06-01  0:27         ` NeilBrown [this message]

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=87h900eely.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name \
    --to=neilb@suse.com \
    --cc=SteveD@RedHat.com \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).