Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net> wrote: > But what about mounting with different protocol, tcp vs udp for example. I was referring specifically to the R/O / R/W variants of the same mount. Any flag variation that varies the way the NFS client talks to the NFS server must either result in a new superblock or be ignored. David - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
- Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- References:
- Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- From: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>
- Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
- recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- From: "Hua Zhong" <hzhong@gmail.com>
- Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
- Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
- Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
- Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
- Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- Prev by Date: request for information about the "ath5k" licensing
- Next by Date: Re: hda_intel : Patch + Regression in 2.6.18 -> 2.6.22
- Previous by thread: Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- Next by thread: Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- Index(es):
 |