NFSv4 boot support?

[Uwe Kleine-König]

On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 03:17:02PM +0100, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> Hello Dan,
> 
> On 19.02.24 03:17, Dan Shelton wrote:
> > On Sat, 17 Feb 2024 at 09:51, Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum at pengutronix.de> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello Antony,
> >>
> >> On 05.02.24 10:59, Antony Pavlov wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 22:37:50 +0100
> >>> Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum at pengutronix.de> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi All!
> >>>
> >>>> Hello Dan,
> >>>>
> >>>> On 31.01.24 22:03, Dan Shelton wrote:
> >>>>> Hello!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Does barebox support booting from a NFSv4 filesystem, e.g. boot from
> >>>>> NFSv4 filesystem into a Linux NFSv4 netroot (diskless machine)?
> >>>>
> >>>> The barebox network stack only does UDP/IP. There have been attempts to
> >>>> bring a TCP stack into barebox, but none have so far succeeded to
> >>>> make it mainline. This is a hard requirement before we can consider
> >>>> supporting NFSv4. I hope that lwIP could fill this gap in the future,
> >>>> but no one is actively continuing this work as far as I am aware[1].
> >>>
> >>> I have started integration on picotcp into barebox in 2015, see
> >>>   https://lore.barebox.org/barebox/1436991230-14251-10-git-send-email-antonynpavlov@gmail.com/T/
> >>>
> >>> At the moment I have WIP barebox-v2023.11 with integrated picotcp 2.1:
> >>>
> >>>   https://github.com/frantony/barebox/tree/20231127.picotcp
> >>
> >> Cool. Looking at Oleksij's repo, it was based on your work. How well does
> >> picotcp work for you? What open issues remain with the patch stack? Is the
> >> barebox integration actively used in projects?
> >>
> >> Is https://github.com/tass-belgium/picotcp the official repository? This hasn't
> >> seen development activity in 5 years. lwIP on the other hand still sees active
> >> development.
> >>
> >> Regarding the license, inclusion of BSD-licensed code is ok. You can check out
> >> the LICENSES/ subdirectory for the licenses covering barebox.
> > 
> > If TCP support lands in barebox, how fast can NFSv4 support be implemented?
> 
> Depends on who's volunteering to do it. :-)
> If your question instead is how much effort a NFSv4 port would be, Uwe did the
> NFSv3 port and may have an guesstimate for this?

Without having taken a deeper look: I think the step from NFSv2 to NFSv3
was much easier than NFSv3 -> NFSv4 will be. For NFSv3 support I needed
4 full work days.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/barebox/attachments/20240220/9b9283b3/attachment.sig>