Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from gproxy7-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com ([70.40.196.235]:36254 "HELO gproxy7-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751977AbaKEBak (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Nov 2014 20:30:40 -0500 From: Henrique Martins To: Steve Dickson cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: F20 nfs-utils exportfs patch In-reply-to: <54591385.2080007@RedHat.com> References: <14393.1409936528@monster.martins.cc> <15531.1414780435@monster.martins.cc> <54591385.2080007@RedHat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 17:30:32 -0800 Message-ID: <16217.1415151032@monster.martins.cc> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Missed these comments in the middle of the patch ... > Just curious as to why these changes... What does D_PARSE do that > D_GENERAL does not? D_PARSE, and L_WARNING, don't cause xlog to return an error, D_GENERAL and L_ERROR do. An error from xlog which will cause nfsd to error out and not start. I changed L_ERROR with L_WARNING, but there was no D_WARNING def or similar so I went with D_PARSE instead of adding that one. > When testing the patch, I notice two "Failed to resolve" warning messages > are logged for each export... Its not because of this patch but > I wounder how that could be cleaned up a bit.... Hopefully you solved that, otherwise I would have to hunt on which machine I generated those patches, if I didn't wipe out the rpmbuild environment yet.. -- Henrique