diff mbox

nfs-utils-1.2.9 does not play well with linux 3.10.x

Message ID 20131216200301.GD31816@fieldses.org (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

J. Bruce Fields Dec. 16, 2013, 8:03 p.m. UTC 
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:54:19PM -0500, bfields wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 07:16:00PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > rpc.nfsd insists on adding "-4.2" when writing /proc/fs/nfsd/versions :
> >   rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: +4.1 -4.2 -2 +3 +4
> > Which causes Linux to return an EIVAL error as 3.10 has no support for 4.2 
> > and
> > does not accept any reference to 4.2
> > 
> > It seems reasonable to me that Linux should accpect -4.2 as a noop and 
> > continue
> > processing the rest of the options but I am just guessing.
> > Anyhow, just to test I applied this commit to my 3.10.24 kernel:
> >    
> > http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=4bdc33ed5bd9fbaa243bda6fdccb22674aed6305
> > and now it accepts the "-4.2" but I have no idea if this messes up 
> > something else.
> 
> That should be perfectly safe.
> 
> I agree that we should teach the kernel to treat "-4.x" at least as a
> no-op for unknown .x.  But nfs-utils also has to keep working with older
> kernels which don't do that.
> 
> The problem was introduced by 12a590f8d556c00a9502eeebaa763d906222d521
> "rpc.nfsd: Allow v4.2 server support with the -V option".  That should
> be using an array of ints not a bit array, so it can make the
> distinction between "off", "on", and "don't care".

So, something like this (untested).--b.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Comments

Joakim Tjernlund Dec. 16, 2013, 8:21 p.m. UTC | #1 
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote on 2013/12/16 21:03:01:

> From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
> To: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@transmode.se>, 
> Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, steved@redhat.com
> Date: 2013/12/16 21:03
> Subject: Re: nfs-utils-1.2.9 does not play well with linux 3.10.x
> 
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:54:19PM -0500, bfields wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 07:16:00PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > rpc.nfsd insists on adding "-4.2" when writing 
/proc/fs/nfsd/versions :
> > >   rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: +4.1 -4.2 -2 +3 +4
> > > Which causes Linux to return an EIVAL error as 3.10 has no support 
for 4.2 
> > > and
> > > does not accept any reference to 4.2
> > > 
> > > It seems reasonable to me that Linux should accpect -4.2 as a noop 
and 
> > > continue
> > > processing the rest of the options but I am just guessing.
> > > Anyhow, just to test I applied this commit to my 3.10.24 kernel:
> > > 
> > > 
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=4bdc33ed5bd9fbaa243bda6fdccb22674aed6305

> > > and now it accepts the "-4.2" but I have no idea if this messes up 
> > > something else.
> > 
> > That should be perfectly safe.

Thanks, I will keep this then until nfs-utils is working.

> > 
> > I agree that we should teach the kernel to treat "-4.x" at least as a
> > no-op for unknown .x.  But nfs-utils also has to keep working with 
older
> > kernels which don't do that.
> > 
> > The problem was introduced by 12a590f8d556c00a9502eeebaa763d906222d521
> > "rpc.nfsd: Allow v4.2 server support with the -V option".  That should
> > be using an array of ints not a bit array, so it can make the
> > distinction between "off", "on", and "don't care".
> 
> So, something like this (untested).--b.

I tested this on my system(which has the above kernel patch) and I noticed
a difference:
  rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: -2 +3 +4 
which is different than previous
 rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: +4.1 -4.2 -2 +3 +4

The "+4.1" is missing.

 Jocke
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
J. Bruce Fields Dec. 16, 2013, 8:23 p.m. UTC | #2 
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 09:21:15PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote on 2013/12/16 21:03:01:
> 
> > From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
> > To: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@transmode.se>, 
> > Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, steved@redhat.com
> > Date: 2013/12/16 21:03
> > Subject: Re: nfs-utils-1.2.9 does not play well with linux 3.10.x
> > 
> > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:54:19PM -0500, bfields wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 07:16:00PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > > rpc.nfsd insists on adding "-4.2" when writing 
> /proc/fs/nfsd/versions :
> > > >   rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: +4.1 -4.2 -2 +3 +4
> > > > Which causes Linux to return an EIVAL error as 3.10 has no support 
> for 4.2 
> > > > and
> > > > does not accept any reference to 4.2
> > > > 
> > > > It seems reasonable to me that Linux should accpect -4.2 as a noop 
> and 
> > > > continue
> > > > processing the rest of the options but I am just guessing.
> > > > Anyhow, just to test I applied this commit to my 3.10.24 kernel:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=4bdc33ed5bd9fbaa243bda6fdccb22674aed6305
> 
> > > > and now it accepts the "-4.2" but I have no idea if this messes up 
> > > > something else.
> > > 
> > > That should be perfectly safe.
> 
> Thanks, I will keep this then until nfs-utils is working.
> 
> > > 
> > > I agree that we should teach the kernel to treat "-4.x" at least as a
> > > no-op for unknown .x.  But nfs-utils also has to keep working with 
> older
> > > kernels which don't do that.
> > > 
> > > The problem was introduced by 12a590f8d556c00a9502eeebaa763d906222d521
> > > "rpc.nfsd: Allow v4.2 server support with the -V option".  That should
> > > be using an array of ints not a bit array, so it can make the
> > > distinction between "off", "on", and "don't care".
> > 
> > So, something like this (untested).--b.
> 
> I tested this on my system(which has the above kernel patch) and I noticed
> a difference:

Thanks!

>   rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: -2 +3 +4 
> which is different than previous
>  rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: +4.1 -4.2 -2 +3 +4
> 
> The "+4.1" is missing.

Yes, that's intentional.  Is it causing you any problem?

--b.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Joakim Tjernlund Dec. 16, 2013, 10:24 p.m. UTC | #3 
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote on 2013/12/16 21:23:45:

> From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
> To: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@transmode.se>, 
> Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, steved@redhat.com
> Date: 2013/12/16 21:23
> Subject: Re: nfs-utils-1.2.9 does not play well with linux 3.10.x
> 
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 09:21:15PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote on 2013/12/16 21:03:01:
> > 
> > > From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
> > > To: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@transmode.se>, 
> > > Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, steved@redhat.com
> > > Date: 2013/12/16 21:03
> > > Subject: Re: nfs-utils-1.2.9 does not play well with linux 3.10.x
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:54:19PM -0500, bfields wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 07:16:00PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > > > rpc.nfsd insists on adding "-4.2" when writing 
> > /proc/fs/nfsd/versions :
> > > > >   rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: +4.1 -4.2 -2 +3 +4
> > > > > Which causes Linux to return an EIVAL error as 3.10 has no 
support 
> > for 4.2 
> > > > > and
> > > > > does not accept any reference to 4.2
> > > > > 
> > > > > It seems reasonable to me that Linux should accpect -4.2 as a 
noop 
> > and 
> > > > > continue
> > > > > processing the rest of the options but I am just guessing.
> > > > > Anyhow, just to test I applied this commit to my 3.10.24 kernel:
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > 
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=4bdc33ed5bd9fbaa243bda6fdccb22674aed6305

> > 
> > > > > and now it accepts the "-4.2" but I have no idea if this messes 
up 
> > > > > something else.
> > > > 
> > > > That should be perfectly safe.
> > 
> > Thanks, I will keep this then until nfs-utils is working.
> > 
> > > > 
> > > > I agree that we should teach the kernel to treat "-4.x" at least 
as a
> > > > no-op for unknown .x.  But nfs-utils also has to keep working with 

> > older
> > > > kernels which don't do that.
> > > > 
> > > > The problem was introduced by 
12a590f8d556c00a9502eeebaa763d906222d521
> > > > "rpc.nfsd: Allow v4.2 server support with the -V option".  That 
should
> > > > be using an array of ints not a bit array, so it can make the
> > > > distinction between "off", "on", and "don't care".
> > > 
> > > So, something like this (untested).--b.
> > 
> > I tested this on my system(which has the above kernel patch) and I 
noticed
> > a difference:
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> >   rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: -2 +3 +4 
> > which is different than previous
> >  rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: +4.1 -4.2 -2 +3 +4
> > 
> > The "+4.1" is missing.
> 
> Yes, that's intentional.  Is it causing you any problem?

I don't know yet, but I don't think it would be a problem for me.
However, are you not changing the defaults here? In that
case someone else relying on 4.1 might have a problem I guess.

 Jocke

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
J. Bruce Fields Dec. 17, 2013, 3:38 a.m. UTC | #4 
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 11:24:03PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote on 2013/12/16 21:23:45:
> 
> > From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
> > To: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@transmode.se>, 
> > Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, steved@redhat.com
> > Date: 2013/12/16 21:23
> > Subject: Re: nfs-utils-1.2.9 does not play well with linux 3.10.x
> > 
> > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 09:21:15PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote on 2013/12/16 21:03:01:
> > > 
> > > > From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
> > > > To: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@transmode.se>, 
> > > > Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, steved@redhat.com
> > > > Date: 2013/12/16 21:03
> > > > Subject: Re: nfs-utils-1.2.9 does not play well with linux 3.10.x
> > > > 
> > > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:54:19PM -0500, bfields wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 07:16:00PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > > > > rpc.nfsd insists on adding "-4.2" when writing 
> > > /proc/fs/nfsd/versions :
> > > > > >   rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: +4.1 -4.2 -2 +3 +4
> > > > > > Which causes Linux to return an EIVAL error as 3.10 has no 
> support 
> > > for 4.2 
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > does not accept any reference to 4.2
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > It seems reasonable to me that Linux should accpect -4.2 as a 
> noop 
> > > and 
> > > > > > continue
> > > > > > processing the rest of the options but I am just guessing.
> > > > > > Anyhow, just to test I applied this commit to my 3.10.24 kernel:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > 
> http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=4bdc33ed5bd9fbaa243bda6fdccb22674aed6305
> 
> > > 
> > > > > > and now it accepts the "-4.2" but I have no idea if this messes 
> up 
> > > > > > something else.
> > > > > 
> > > > > That should be perfectly safe.
> > > 
> > > Thanks, I will keep this then until nfs-utils is working.
> > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > I agree that we should teach the kernel to treat "-4.x" at least 
> as a
> > > > > no-op for unknown .x.  But nfs-utils also has to keep working with 
> 
> > > older
> > > > > kernels which don't do that.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The problem was introduced by 
> 12a590f8d556c00a9502eeebaa763d906222d521
> > > > > "rpc.nfsd: Allow v4.2 server support with the -V option".  That 
> should
> > > > > be using an array of ints not a bit array, so it can make the
> > > > > distinction between "off", "on", and "don't care".
> > > > 
> > > > So, something like this (untested).--b.
> > > 
> > > I tested this on my system(which has the above kernel patch) and I 
> noticed
> > > a difference:
> > 
> > Thanks!
> > 
> > >   rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: -2 +3 +4 
> > > which is different than previous
> > >  rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: +4.1 -4.2 -2 +3 +4
> > > 
> > > The "+4.1" is missing.
> > 
> > Yes, that's intentional.  Is it causing you any problem?
> 
> I don't know yet, but I don't think it would be a problem for me.
> However, are you not changing the defaults here? In that
> case someone else relying on 4.1 might have a problem I guess.

That's just restoring the behavior we had before
12a590f8d556c00a9502eeebaa763d906222d521, and will still result in 4.1
being turned on if the kernel is recent enough.

--b.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Joakim Tjernlund Dec. 17, 2013, 6:30 a.m. UTC | #5 
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote on 2013/12/17 04:38:49:
> 
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 11:24:03PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote on 2013/12/16 21:23:45:
> > 
> > > From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
> > > To: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@transmode.se>, 
> > > Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, steved@redhat.com
> > > Date: 2013/12/16 21:23
> > > Subject: Re: nfs-utils-1.2.9 does not play well with linux 3.10.x
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 09:21:15PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > > "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote on 2013/12/16 
21:03:01:
> > > > 
> > > > > From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
> > > > > To: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@transmode.se>, 
> > > > > Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, steved@redhat.com
> > > > > Date: 2013/12/16 21:03
> > > > > Subject: Re: nfs-utils-1.2.9 does not play well with linux 
3.10.x
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:54:19PM -0500, bfields wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 07:16:00PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund 
wrote:
> > > > > > > rpc.nfsd insists on adding "-4.2" when writing 
> > > > /proc/fs/nfsd/versions :
> > > > > > >   rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: +4.1 -4.2 -2 
+3 +4
> > > > > > > Which causes Linux to return an EIVAL error as 3.10 has no 
> > support 
> > > > for 4.2 
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > does not accept any reference to 4.2
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > It seems reasonable to me that Linux should accpect -4.2 as 
a 
> > noop 
> > > > and 
> > > > > > > continue
> > > > > > > processing the rest of the options but I am just guessing.
> > > > > > > Anyhow, just to test I applied this commit to my 3.10.24 
kernel:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > 
> > 
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=4bdc33ed5bd9fbaa243bda6fdccb22674aed6305

> > 
> > > > 
> > > > > > > and now it accepts the "-4.2" but I have no idea if this 
messes 
> > up 
> > > > > > > something else.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > That should be perfectly safe.
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks, I will keep this then until nfs-utils is working.
> > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I agree that we should teach the kernel to treat "-4.x" at 
least 
> > as a
> > > > > > no-op for unknown .x.  But nfs-utils also has to keep working 
with 
> > 
> > > > older
> > > > > > kernels which don't do that.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The problem was introduced by 
> > 12a590f8d556c00a9502eeebaa763d906222d521
> > > > > > "rpc.nfsd: Allow v4.2 server support with the -V option". That 

> > should
> > > > > > be using an array of ints not a bit array, so it can make the
> > > > > > distinction between "off", "on", and "don't care".
> > > > > 
> > > > > So, something like this (untested).--b.
> > > > 
> > > > I tested this on my system(which has the above kernel patch) and I 

> > noticed
> > > > a difference:
> > > 
> > > Thanks!
> > > 
> > > >   rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: -2 +3 +4 
> > > > which is different than previous
> > > >  rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: +4.1 -4.2 -2 +3 +4
> > > > 
> > > > The "+4.1" is missing.
> > > 
> > > Yes, that's intentional.  Is it causing you any problem?
> > 
> > I don't know yet, but I don't think it would be a problem for me.
> > However, are you not changing the defaults here? In that
> > case someone else relying on 4.1 might have a problem I guess.
> 
> That's just restoring the behavior we had before
> 12a590f8d556c00a9502eeebaa763d906222d521, and will still result in 4.1
> being turned on if the kernel is recent enough.

What is an recent enough kernel? Does not 3.10.24 patched with the patch I 
mentioned
earlier? I thought it would make 3.10 look like a 3.11 which have 4.2 
supported.
If I am mistaken we good I guess.

 Jocke 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
J. Bruce Fields Dec. 17, 2013, 3:24 p.m. UTC | #6 
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 07:30:38AM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote on 2013/12/17 04:38:49:
> > 
> > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 11:24:03PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote on 2013/12/16 21:23:45:
> > > 
> > > > From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
> > > > To: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@transmode.se>, 
> > > > Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, steved@redhat.com
> > > > Date: 2013/12/16 21:23
> > > > Subject: Re: nfs-utils-1.2.9 does not play well with linux 3.10.x
> > > > 
> > > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 09:21:15PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > > > I tested this on my system(which has the above kernel patch) and I 
> 
> > > noticed
> > > > > a difference:
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks!
> > > > 
> > > > >   rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: -2 +3 +4 
> > > > > which is different than previous
> > > > >  rpc.nfsd: Writing version string to kernel: +4.1 -4.2 -2 +3 +4
> > > > > 
> > > > > The "+4.1" is missing.
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, that's intentional.  Is it causing you any problem?
> > > 
> > > I don't know yet, but I don't think it would be a problem for me.
> > > However, are you not changing the defaults here? In that
> > > case someone else relying on 4.1 might have a problem I guess.
> > 
> > That's just restoring the behavior we had before
> > 12a590f8d556c00a9502eeebaa763d906222d521, and will still result in 4.1
> > being turned on if the kernel is recent enough.
> 
> What is an recent enough kernel? Does not 3.10.24 patched with the patch I 
> mentioned
> earlier? I thought it would make 3.10 look like a 3.11 which have 4.2 
> supported.
> If I am mistaken we good I guess.

Sorry, I don't understand exactly what your concern is.

--b.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/support/include/nfs/nfs.h b/support/include/nfs/nfs.h
index 38db5b5..df4ad76 100644
--- a/support/include/nfs/nfs.h
+++ b/support/include/nfs/nfs.h
@@ -17,7 +17,6 @@ 
 
 #define NFS4_MINMINOR 1
 #define NFS4_MAXMINOR 2
-#define NFS4_VERDEFAULT  0x1  /* minor verion 1 */
 
 struct nfs_fh_len {
 	int		fh_size;
diff --git a/utils/nfsd/nfsd.c b/utils/nfsd/nfsd.c
index 6db92f0..a9d77ab 100644
--- a/utils/nfsd/nfsd.c
+++ b/utils/nfsd/nfsd.c
@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@  main(int argc, char **argv)
 	char *p, *progname, *port;
 	char *haddr = NULL;
 	int	socket_up = 0;
-	int minorvers = NFS4_VERDEFAULT;	/* nfsv4 minor version */
+	int minorvers[NFS4_MAXMINOR + 1] = {0};
 	unsigned int versbits = NFSCTL_VERDEFAULT;
 	unsigned int protobits = NFSCTL_ALLBITS;
 	unsigned int proto4 = 0;
@@ -164,7 +164,7 @@  main(int argc, char **argv)
 						fprintf(stderr, "%s: unsupported minor version\n", optarg);
 						exit(1);
 					}
-					NFSCTL_VERUNSET(minorvers, i);
+					minorvers[i] = -1;
 					break;
 				}
 			case 3:
@@ -185,7 +185,7 @@  main(int argc, char **argv)
 						fprintf(stderr, "%s: unsupported minor version\n", optarg);
 						exit(1);
 					}
-					NFSCTL_VERSET(minorvers, i);
+					minorvers[i] = 1;
 					break;
 				}
 			case 3:
diff --git a/utils/nfsd/nfssvc.c b/utils/nfsd/nfssvc.c
index 8b85846..1b50aba 100644
--- a/utils/nfsd/nfssvc.c
+++ b/utils/nfsd/nfssvc.c
@@ -269,7 +269,7 @@  nfssvc_set_sockets(const int family, const unsigned int protobits,
 }
 
 void
-nfssvc_setvers(unsigned int ctlbits, int minorvers)
+nfssvc_setvers(unsigned int ctlbits, int minorvers[])
 {
 	int fd, n, off;
 	char *ptr;
@@ -281,9 +281,9 @@  nfssvc_setvers(unsigned int ctlbits, int minorvers)
 		return;
 
 	for (n = NFS4_MINMINOR; n <= NFS4_MAXMINOR; n++) {
-		if (NFSCTL_VERISSET(minorvers, n)) 
+		if (minorvers[n] == 1)
 			off += snprintf(ptr+off, sizeof(buf) - off, "+4.%d ", n);
-		else			
+		else if (minorvers[n] == -1)
 			off += snprintf(ptr+off, sizeof(buf) - off, "-4.%d ", n);
 	}
 	for (n = NFSD_MINVERS; n <= NFSD_MAXVERS; n++) {
diff --git a/utils/nfsd/nfssvc.h b/utils/nfsd/nfssvc.h
index 08de0fe..2bbd3d3 100644
--- a/utils/nfsd/nfssvc.h
+++ b/utils/nfsd/nfssvc.h
@@ -24,5 +24,5 @@  void	nfssvc_mount_nfsdfs(char *progname);
 int	nfssvc_inuse(void);
 int	nfssvc_set_sockets(const int family, const unsigned int protobits,
 			   const char *host, const char *port);
-void	nfssvc_setvers(unsigned int ctlbits, int minorvers4);
+void	nfssvc_setvers(unsigned int ctlbits, int minorvers4[]);
 int	nfssvc_threads(unsigned short port, int nrservs);