Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760800AbWLHSbW (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Dec 2006 13:31:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760817AbWLHSbV (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Dec 2006 13:31:21 -0500 Received: from e5.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.145]:36093 "EHLO e5.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760800AbWLHSbV (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Dec 2006 13:31:21 -0500 Message-ID: <4579AFA5.90003@us.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2006 12:32:05 -0600 From: Steve French User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061025) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: akpm@osdl.org CC: linux-kernel , Shirish S Pargaonkar , simo , Jeremy Allison , linux-cifs-client@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2319 Lines: 52 akpm wrote: >deprecate-smbfs-in-favour-of-cifs.patch >deprecate-smbfs-in-favour-of-cifs-docs.patch > > Am still waiting to hear from sfrench on the appropriateness of this. smbfs deprecation is ok but there are a few things to consider: 1) Secure mounts: although more secure mounts are possible now to Windows (not just Samba) with the most recent NTLMv2 patch in the cifs tree, implementation of Kerberized mounts are stuck in debates about the right upcall mechanisms (gssapi/spnego blobs can be almost 64K in size, and userspace turned out to need to keep state across a sequence of two to three upcalls before discarding its state which complicates things). smbfs can handle kerberos mounts in some cases so this is critical, even though in practice ntlmv2 is often good enough. 2) minor holes in backlevel server (OS/2 and Windows 9x/WindowsME) support cifs is better in many cases than smbfs for this now, but cifs does not handle utimes() remotely to them yet ie setting date/time the old style DOS or OS/2 way (cifs can of course query the time fine). This may not matter for most cases and would be pretty easy to finish up 3) Documentation - minor cifs vs. smbfs differences in syntax/behavior. I have added some of this to the cifs documentation .odt file but have not posted the pdf yet nor updated the shorter fs/cifs/README with some of this helpful information (differences in syntax to help users migrating from smbfs). I will post that to the cifs project site as PDF and .ODT this weekend. 4) Hot bugs ... For most users we should be ok here, but there is one major unresolved bug that worries me: the cache_reap bug ("sleeping function called from invalid context" in list_del+0x9/0x6c) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214622 Not sure whose bug that will turn out to be and ACPI settings seem to affect it but it obviously affects some 2.6.19 users. Running simple tests on smbfs, I run into so many problems now though, it is probably time to mark it as deprecated as Fedora etc. apparently already have. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/