[U-Boot] [PATCH V2] net: NFS: Add NFSv3 support
Joe Hershberger
joe.hershberger at gmail.com
Sat Jun 25 21:26:00 CEST 2016
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 09:45:38AM +0200, Guillaume Gardet wrote:
> >
> >
> > Le 23/06/2016 21:08, Tom Rini a écrit :
> > >On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 11:10:26AM +0200, Guillaume GARDET wrote:
> > >
> > >>This patch enables NFSv3 support.
> > >>If NFSv2 is available use it as usual.
> > >>If NFSv2 is not available, but NFSv3 is available, use NFSv3.
> > >>If NFSv2 and NFSv3 are not available, print an error message since NFSv4 is not supported.
> > >>
> > >>Tested on iMX6 sabrelite with 4 Linux NFS servers:
> > >> * NFSv2 + NFSv3 + NFSv4 server: use NFSv2 protocol
> > >> * NFSv2 + NFSv3 server: use NFSv3 protocol
> > >> * NFSv3 + NFSv4 server: use NFSv3 protocol
> > >> * NFSv3 server: use NFSv3 protocol
> > >So, why do we have v2+v3+v4 -> v2 and not v2+v3+v4 -> v3, when we do
> > >v2+v3 -> v3 and v3+v4 -> v3 ? We should be consistent in preferring
> > >either v2 over v3 or v3 over v2. Thanks!
> > >
> >
> > Sorry, it is a typo error. Please read: "NFSv2 + NFSv3 server: use NFSv2 protocol".
> >
> > As long as NFSv2 is available, we use it. Otherwise, we use v3 if
> > available. As explained above.
>
> OK, that makes sense, thanks! Joe, I assume you can just fix that in
> the commit message when you pick this up.
Yup, no problem.
More information about the U-Boot
mailing list