public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, steved@redhat.com, nfsv4@linux-nfs.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] NFS: Propagate 'fsc' mount option through automounts
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:50:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <12455.1247655052@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1247598200.6122.122.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org>

Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com> wrote:

> > > Why not just use the mount path as the default uniquifier?

In fact, why change it from being blank?  If I do this:

	The natural thing would be to use the mount path that is required to
	locate the super block's root dentry on the server (i.e. the mount
	path for sb->s_root).

then it may as well be blank, since the FSID is a sufficient uniquifier, and
that's also included in the key.


Where a uniquifier is needed is when someone sets up two mounts of the same
thing, but with different network parameters as these aren't recorded in the
key.  Under such a circumstance, manual intervention is required in the form
of a supplied uniquifier on one of the mounts.

That uniquifier should also only apply to the superblock actually being
mounted, I think; but it's probably okay to apply it to all the intervening
transient superblocks from root that nfs_follow_remote_path() causes to exist,
and just accept that you might get a little bit of rubbish in the cache once
we start caching directories.

Also, the uniquifier would be applied to all superblocks that get created by
automounts under a superblock that has a uniquifier.

David

      reply	other threads:[~2009-07-15 10:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-07-09 17:27 [PATCH][RFC] NFS: Propagate 'fsc' mount option through automounts David Howells
2009-07-09 17:50 ` Trond Myklebust
2009-07-14 17:47   ` David Howells
2009-07-14 19:03     ` Trond Myklebust
2009-07-15 10:50       ` David Howells [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=12455.1247655052@redhat.com \
    --to=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nfsv4@linux-nfs.org \
    --cc=steved@redhat.com \
    /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