From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261987AbUCaO5X (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Mar 2004 09:57:23 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261990AbUCaO5X (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Mar 2004 09:57:23 -0500 Received: from mail.shareable.org ([81.29.64.88]:27028 "EHLO mail.shareable.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261987AbUCaO5W (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Mar 2004 09:57:22 -0500 Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 15:57:11 +0100 From: Jamie Lokier To: Trond Myklebust Cc: Jan Kesten , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: kernel 2.6.4 and nfs lockd.udpport? Message-ID: <20040331145711.GB18990@mail.shareable.org> References: <200403290958.i2T9w2fJ029554@mail.bytecamp.net> <1080587948.2410.68.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1080587948.2410.68.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Trond Myklebust wrote: > > I read the docs and found that the parameters sould be lockd.udpport and > > lockd.tcpport=xxx - but this doesn't work. While booting I got errors that > > both are unknown boot options. > > > > Where is my mistake? > > Someone updated lockd so that it uses a sysctl-based interface instead. > Apparently without changing the docs. I added the sysctl-based interface, and kept the modules parameters, and updated the code in line with the 2.6 module parameter style. See the "module_param_call" lines in fs/lockd/svc.c. The module parameters "nlm_udpport" and "nlm_tcpport" _do_ work -- I use them with my firewall. For some reason, because modules don't need #ifdef MODULE any more, I thought module_param*() entries would be automatically available as boot parameters. Silly me, that would be too obvious. -- Jamie