Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 29 Oct 2021 15:14:35 -0400
From:   "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To:     Steve Dickson <steved@redhat.com>
Cc:     Linux NFS Mailing list <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] Enable inter server to server copies on a export
Message-ID: <20211029191435.GI19967@fieldses.org>
References: <20211028144851.644018-1-steved@redhat.com>
 <20211029134534.GA19967@fieldses.org>
 <3e928624-6a7a-8583-7ea4-4eef9c22488e@redhat.com>
 <20211029164058.GE19967@fieldses.org>
 <65b31c94-54aa-5035-546c-75eb0048ba96@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <65b31c94-54aa-5035-546c-75eb0048ba96@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 01:30:36PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
> On 10/29/21 12:40, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> >Let's just stick with that for now, and leave it off by default until
> >we're sure it's mature enough.  Let's not introduce new configuration to
> >work around problems that we haven't really analyzed yet.
> How is this going to find problems? At least with the export option
> it is documented

That sounds fixable.  We need documentation of module parameters anyway.

> and it more if a stick you toe in the pool verses
> jumping in...

If we want more fine-grained control, I'm not yet seeing the argument
that an export option on the destination server side is the way to do
it.

Let's document the module parameter and go with that for now.

--b.