From: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: steved@redhat.com, nfsv4@linux-nfs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] NFS: Propagate 'fsc' mount option through automounts
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:50:51 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1247161851.5766.44.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1552.1247160463@redhat.com>
On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 18:27 +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Propagate the NFS 'fsc' mount option through NFS automounts of various types.
>
> This is now required as commit:
>
> commit c02d7adf8c5429727a98bad1d039bccad4c61c50
> Author: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
> Date: Mon Jun 22 15:09:14 2009 -0400
>
> NFSv4: Replace nfs4_path_walk() with VFS path lookup in a private namespace
>
> now uses VFS-driven automounting to reach all submounts barring the root, thus
> preventing fscaching from being enabled on any submount other than the root.
>
> This patch gets around that by propagating the NFS_OPTION_FSCACHE flag across
> automounts.
>
> Note, however, that it doesn't propagate the uniquifier in the case of
> 'fsc=<xxx>' being passed to mount. This is probably wrong, and needs looking
> at.
Why not just use the mount path as the default uniquifier?
> Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
> ---
>
> fs/nfs/client.c | 1 +
> fs/nfs/super.c | 6 ++++++
> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/client.c b/fs/nfs/client.c
> index c2d0616..0949b46 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/client.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/client.c
> @@ -964,6 +964,7 @@ static void nfs_server_copy_userdata(struct nfs_server *target, struct nfs_serve
> target->acdirmin = source->acdirmin;
> target->acdirmax = source->acdirmax;
> target->caps = source->caps;
> + target->options = source->options;
BTW: Why does fscache require a private flag field?
> }
>
> /*
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/super.c b/fs/nfs/super.c
> index 0b4cbdc..bfab16f 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/super.c
> @@ -2214,6 +2214,7 @@ static int nfs_xdev_get_sb(struct file_system_type *fs_type, int flags,
> struct nfs_server *server;
> struct dentry *mntroot;
> int (*compare_super)(struct super_block *, void *) = nfs_compare_super;
> + struct nfs_parsed_mount_data parsed_data = { .fscache_uniq = NULL, };
Rather than wasting all this space on the stack, how about just changing
the second argument of nfs_fscache_get_super_cookie()? You only use the
pointer to data->fscache_uniq.
> struct nfs_sb_mountdata sb_mntdata = {
> .mntflags = flags,
> };
--
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer
NetApp
Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com
www.netapp.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-09 17:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-09 17:27 David Howells
2009-07-09 17:50 ` Trond Myklebust [this message]
2009-07-14 17:47 ` David Howells
2009-07-14 19:03 ` Trond Myklebust
2009-07-15 10:50 ` David Howells
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1247161851.5766.44.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org \
--to=trond.myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nfsv4@linux-nfs.org \
--cc=steved@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®