From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 17 02:15:56 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E50D972 for ; Sat, 17 Nov 2012 02:15:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rmacklem@uoguelph.ca) Received: from esa-jnhn.mail.uoguelph.ca (esa-jnhn.mail.uoguelph.ca [131.104.91.44]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B2CC8FC0C for ; Sat, 17 Nov 2012 02:15:55 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AigIANHyplCDaFvO/2dsb2JhbABEhiC+DgeCIyWBCwINGQJfiCALnUGOU5J8gSKPC4ETA4hajSKQQ4MNgXs X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.83,268,1352091600"; d="scan'208";a="575603" Received: from erie.cs.uoguelph.ca (HELO zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca) ([131.104.91.206]) by esa-jnhn.mail.uoguelph.ca with ESMTP; 16 Nov 2012 21:15:49 -0500 Received: from zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2178CB3F44 for ; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 21:15:49 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 21:15:49 -0500 (EST) From: Rick Macklem To: "freebsd-fs@freebsd.org" Message-ID: <1597743449.486373.1353118549122.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> Subject: RFC: moving NFSv4.1 client from projects to head MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [172.17.91.203] X-Mailer: Zimbra 6.0.10_GA_2692 (ZimbraWebClient - FF3.0 (Win)/6.0.10_GA_2692) X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 02:15:56 -0000 Hi, I've been working on NFSv4.1 client support for FreeBSD for some time now and known issues from testing at a Bakeathon last June have been resolved. The patch is rather big, but I believe it should not affect the client unless the new mount options: minorversion=1,pnfs are used for an nfsv4 mount. Since I don't believe that the new NFS client will be affected unless these new mount options are used, I think it could go into head now. On the other hand, there are few NFSv4.1 servers currently available, so it might not yet be widely useful. (See below for slides w.r.t. server availability.) How do folks feel about doing this in early December? Since it doesn't change any KBIs, it could also be MFC'd to stable/9. Would MFC'ing it to stable/9 make sense? For those interested in testing and/or reviewing it, the code is currently in: base/projects/nfsv4.1-client (It is purely a kernel patch.) Also, the current state of NFSv4.1 servers is roughly: http://www.pnfs.com/docs/LISA-11-pNFS-BoF-final.pdf Thanks in advance for any comments, rick