Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-f52.google.com ([209.85.218.52]:36043 "EHLO mail-oi0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751318AbbGFQx6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jul 2015 12:53:58 -0400 Received: by oiaf66 with SMTP id f66so90470452oia.3 for ; Mon, 06 Jul 2015 09:53:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <559AB1F1.1070704@RedHat.com> References: <1436193748-4301-1-git-send-email-steved@redhat.com> <559AB1F1.1070704@RedHat.com> Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2015 12:53:57 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] mount.nfs: Teach mount.nfs about the mountversion option From: Trond Myklebust To: Steve Dickson Cc: Linux NFS Mailing list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Steve Dickson wrote: > > > On 07/06/2015 11:19 AM, Trond Myklebust wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Steve Dickson wrote: >>> When the mountversion option is used, there should >>> not be any mount negotiations with the server. >>> >>> Also, when the option is used, its know that the mount >>> is a v4 mount and a V_SPECFIC type. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Steve Dickson >>> --- >>> utils/mount/network.c | 7 ++++++- >>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/utils/mount/network.c b/utils/mount/network.c >>> index b5ed850..ebc39d3 100644 >>> --- a/utils/mount/network.c >>> +++ b/utils/mount/network.c >>> @@ -92,6 +92,7 @@ static const char *nfs_version_opttbl[] = { >>> "v4", >>> "vers", >>> "nfsvers", >>> + "minorversion", >>> NULL, >>> }; >>> >>> @@ -1272,7 +1273,11 @@ nfs_nfs_version(struct mount_options *options, struct nfs_version *version) >>> if (!(version->major = strtol(version_val, &cptr, 10))) >>> goto ret_error; >>> >>> - if (version->major < 4) >>> + if (strcmp(nfs_version_opttbl[i], "minorversion") == 0) { >>> + version->v_mode = V_SPECIFIC; >>> + version->minor = version->major; >>> + version->major = 4; >>> + } else if (version->major < 4) >>> version->v_mode = V_SPECIFIC; >>> >>> if (*cptr == '.') { >>> >> >> Doesn't this cause a dependency on the ordering of 'nfsvers'/'vers' >> and 'minorversion' in your mount options string? > I don't think so... The only combination that does not work > is -o nfsvers=3,minorversion=1 which should fail... > > What am I missing? > Does "-o minorversion=1,nfsvers=3" show the same behaviour? Cheers Trond