From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Tue Mar 21 08:50:51 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8077AD0A4B4 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:50:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danny@cs.huji.ac.il) Received: from kabab.cs.huji.ac.il (kabab.cs.huji.ac.il [132.65.116.210]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0FDB8AE; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:50:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danny@cs.huji.ac.il) Received: from bach.cs.huji.ac.il ([132.65.80.20]) by kabab.cs.huji.ac.il with esmtp id 1cqFV9-000NQL-Kt; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 10:50:47 +0200 From: Daniel Braniss Message-Id: <80C5425F-9A71-45D9-BA41-229E4E72EC36@cs.huji.ac.il> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\)) Subject: Re: NFSv2 boot & OLD_NFSV2 Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 10:50:47 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20170321081339.2wbx3rb32qdavvn3@ivaldir.net> Cc: Toomas Soome , Rick Macklem , FreeBSD Current To: Baptiste Daroussin References: <38DD1950-AD12-4A27-8335-54F997E408DF@me.com> <20170320192000.6hal22ibnr3ajog3@ivaldir.net> <1B7471CD-2F2D-4F22-9D25-E46580CF9E96@me.com> <84D239AB-AB57-4A50-9700-E42BBF9CBE5A@cs.huji.ac.il> <20170321081339.2wbx3rb32qdavvn3@ivaldir.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.23 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:50:51 -0000 > On 21 Mar 2017, at 10:13, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >=20 > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 09:58:21AM +0200, Daniel Braniss wrote: >>=20 >>> On 20 Mar 2017, at 23:55, Toomas Soome wrote: >>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> On 20. m=C3=A4rts 2017, at 23:53, Rick Macklem = wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 08:22:12PM +0200, Toomas Soome wrote: >>>>>> Hi! >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> The current boot code is building NFSv3, with preprocessor = conditional OLD_NFSV2. Should NFSv2 code still be kept around or can we = burn it? >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> rgds, >>>>>> toomas >>>>>=20 >>>>> I vote burn >>>>>=20 >>>>> Bapt >>>> I would be happy to see NFSv2 go away. However, depending on how = people configure >>>> their diskless root fs, they do end up using NFSv2 for their root = fs. >>>>=20 >>>> Does booting over NFSv3 affect this? >>>>=20 >>>> I think the answer is no for a FreeBSD server (since the NFSv2 File = Handle is the same as >>>> the NFSv3 one, except padded with 0 bytes to 32bytes long). >>>> However, there might be non-FreeBSD NFS servers where the NFSv2 = file handle is different >>>> than the NFSv3 one and for that case, the user would need NFSv2 = boot code (or >>>> reconfigure their root fs to use NFSv3). >>>>=20 >>>> To be honest, I suspect few realize that they are using NFSv2 for = their root fs. >>>> (They'd see it in a packet trace or via "nfsstat -m", but otherwise = they probably >>>> think they are using NFSv3 for their root fs.) >>>>=20 >>>> rick >>>=20 >>> if they do not suspect, they most likely use v3 - due to simple fact = that you have to rebuild loader to use NFSv2 - it is compile time = option. >>>=20 >>=20 >> old systems, 8.x, still use/boot v2, and so do old linux. >> NetApp has discontinued support for v2, so we had to move this = machines to use FreeBSD server and the day was >> saved. So, till these machines get upgraded/discontinued we have a = problem. There are several solutions >> to this issue, but as long as it's a matter of getting rid for the = sake of it, I would vote to keep it a while longer. >>=20 >> danny >>=20 >>=20 > Given you are speaking of 8.x I suppose you are using the loader that = comes with > it, meaning you are safe if we remove it from the loader in 12.0 (note = as said > by Toomas that is it is already off by default in the 12.0 loader) am = I missing > something? >=20 as usual, did not read the whole thread, I assumed - wrongly - that = support for v2 would be discontinued. removing v2 support from the boot process is fine! great, go for it. It = will only involve newer hosts, and simplifying the boot process is always a good idea. sorry for the noise. danny > Best regards, > Bapt