From: Trond Myklebust Subject: Re: [RFC] new client gssd upcall Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14:13:19 -0400 Message-ID: <1213899199.7120.22.camel@localhost> References: <1213397442-15611-1-git-send-email-bfields@citi.umich.edu> <20080616102859.66fa6a34@tleilax.poochiereds.net> <20080617213622.GA5849@fieldses.org> <1213739969.7288.90.camel@localhost> <485A7D2D.4060206@citi.umich.edu> <20080619114929.5c211ec9@tleilax.poochiereds.net> <1213895182.7120.13.camel@localhost> <20080619132720.6bce2bb9@tleilax.poochiereds.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Olga Kornievskaia , "J. Bruce Fields" , kwc@citi.umich.edu, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Layton Return-path: Received: from mx2.netapp.com ([216.240.18.37]:1324 "EHLO mx2.netapp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751469AbYFSSNj (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14:13:39 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080619132720.6bce2bb9-RtJpwOs3+0O+kQycOl6kW4xkIHaj4LzF@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2008-06-19 at 13:27 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > There's also no reason we couldn't use keys for > idmap upcalls as well. I'm considering them for a similar idmap scheme > for CIFS. Ewww.... NACK, NACK, NACK, NACK.... There is a perfectly good reason why you wouldn't ever want to use keys for idmap upcalls: keys are user/process/thread objects while idmapd entries are NFSv4-namespace objects. -- Trond Myklebust Linux NFS client maintainer NetApp Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com www.netapp.com