Re: [linux-cifs-client] Re: SMB2 file system - should it bea distinct module

[simo]

On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 10:12 -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote:

> Actually I disagree. I think Christoph is correct. These
> are two independent protocols and should be in two different
> modules.

They are independent the same way NFS v4 is independent from NFS v3 and
v2. Independent but related, and most importantly, one is the fallback
of the other.

> > But NTLM 0.12 still works for Vista and DFS referrals.
> > Breaking out SMB2 initially means that it will not clutter
> > the working cifs.ko code.  Remember that an SMB2 client fs is
> > mostly research at this point, and not engineering.
> 
> Long term the common functions should be factored out
> and put into a lower-level module that both cifs and
> SMB2 are dependent upon.
> 
> That's the cleaner solution IMHO.

If the result is that the fallback work without user space intervention,
then I agree with you.
I was just pointing out that the 2 protocols are not in fact completely
independent and this fact need to be properly considered and factored in
into this decision, nothing more, nothing less.

Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer
email: idra@xxxxxxxxx
http://samba.org

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/