Re: RFC: Should intr/soft NFSv4 mounts be disabled?

From: Chris Ross <cross+freebsd_at_distal.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2022 02:45:48 UTC 
> On Jul 1, 2022, at 17:57, Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> NFSv4 mounts using the "soft" and/or "intr" mount options
> have never functioned correctly.  This is noted in the BUGS
> section of "man mount_nfs" and commit c0d14b0220ae
> added the generation of a warning message when such
> a mount is done. […]
> During review of commit c0d14b0220ae, emaste@ asked if
> NFSv4 mounts using "soft" and/or "intr" should actually
> be disabled, so I am now asking others for their opinion
> on this? (Doing so will cause many extant mounts in fstab(5)
> to fail.)

It sounds like failures are likely with them, so I vote they be
desupported.  While I worry about systems becoming stuck
on bad NFS mounts as much as the next person, if we can’t
reliably get the desired safety from soft/intr, no point in
pretending.

         - Chris