Re: [NFS] What's slated for inclusion in 2.6.24-rc1 from the NFS client git tree...

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Thu, 4 Oct 2007 18:43:04 +0200
Pierre Ossman <drzeus-list@drzeus.cx> wrote:

> On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 10:00:50 -0400
> Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 08:52 +0200, Pierre Ossman wrote:
> > > On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 19:41:16 -0400
> > > Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > We also have the 64-bit inode support from RedHat/Peter Staubach.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > As has been pointed[1] out[2], this will cause regressions for
> > > non-LFS applications (of which there are still lots and lots). This
> > > change should be in feature-removal (the "feature" being removed is
> > > legacy support for non-LFS applications using NFS servers that make
> > > full use of the protocol) and preferably accompanied with
> > > appropriate user space changes (e.g. compatibility option in glibc).
> > > 
> > > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=241348
> > > [2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-nfs&m=118701088726477&w=2
> > > 
> > > Rgds
> > 
> > How about a boot/module parameter to turn it on or off?
> > 
> 
> That would be perfect. It can even be in non-legacy mode by default,
> just as long as you can go back to the old behaviour when/if you run
> into a non-LFS application.
> 

Wouldn't a mount option be better?