From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Jan 23 15:55:12 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A1E91065678
	for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Mon, 23 Jan 2012 15:55:12 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jh@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from gw02.mail.saunalahti.fi (gw02.mail.saunalahti.fi
	[195.197.172.116])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D8998FC19
	for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Mon, 23 Jan 2012 15:55:05 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from a91-153-116-96.elisa-laajakaista.fi
	(a91-153-116-96.elisa-laajakaista.fi [91.153.116.96])
	by gw02.mail.saunalahti.fi (Postfix) with SMTP id CBF26176001;
	Mon, 23 Jan 2012 17:38:34 +0200 (EET)
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 17:38:33 +0200
From: Jaakko Heinonen <jh@FreeBSD.org>
To: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>
Message-ID: <20120123153833.GB2246@a91-153-116-96.elisa-laajakaista.fi>
References: <700804423.708964.1327280006066.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <700804423.708964.1327280006066.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: should mount -u fail or silently ignore options?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Filesystems <freebsd-fs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 15:55:12 -0000

On 2012-01-22, Rick Macklem wrote:
> There is a bug in the NFS clients, where a
> "mount -u -o udp /mnt" will cause any threads
> that have an RPC in progress to hang, if the
> mount previously was using too large an rsize/wsize.

Does the hang occur if the UDP transport was already used?

> This case can easily be detected in nfs_mount().
> 
> However, my question is...
> - Should the "mount -u" fail and return an error
> OR
>   Silently ignore the "udp" option and return ok.

Depending on the answer to the question above, IMHO the best solution
would be to return an error if user tries to change TCP to UDP but
accept the "udp" option if UDP transport is already active. I don't know
about potential problems with root nfs.

-- 
Jaakko