On Wed, 2007-12-05 at 17:11 +0000, David Howells wrote:
> The downside of this is that each shared superblock only has one NFS connection
> to the server, and so only one set of connection parameters can be used.
> However, since persistent local caching is novel to Linux, I think that it is
> entirely reasonable to overrule the attempts to make mounts with different
> parameters if they are to be shared and cached.
I think the shared superblock approach is the right one, but I'm a
little concerned that there would now be different behavior for fscache
and non-cached setups. Not sure of any better idea though.
> The R/O mount flag can be dealt with by moving readonlyness into the vfsmount
> rather than having it a property of the superblock. The superblock would then
> be read-only only if all its vfsmounts are also read-only.
Given that, how many connection parameters are there that are likely to
actually differ on the same client, talking to the same server? Really?
> Would it be reasonable to have an outside way of setting directory options?
> For instance, if there was a table like this:
>
> FS SERVER VOLUME DIR OPTIONS
> ======= ======= ======= =============== =========================
> nfs home0 - /home/* fscache
> afs redhat data /data/* fscache
>
> This could then be loaded into the kernel as a set of rules which directory
> lookup by the filesystem involved could attempt to match and apply.
You could store the table in a NIS map, for example, and a udev rule or
similar could trigger to load it later.
Jon.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
