On Mon, 19 Jan 2026, Jeff Layton wrote:
> 
> There is another approach we could consider: We could move the
> export_operations that are needed for local filehandle access into a
> new struct filehandle_operations or something. It does mean adding an
> extra pointer to the super_block for the new operations vector, but it
> might be more intuitive.

If that sort of change were seen to be valuable, I would rather not
create a filehandle_operations but merge some (or all) of
export_operations into super_operations.
Maybe then the existence of s_export_op would return to mean "NFS export
supported" even if it is empty.

Thanks,
NeilBrown

Reply via email to