MFC: r316792
Add an NFSv4.1 mount option for "use one openowner".

Some NFSv4.1 servers such as AmazonEFS can only support a small fixed number
of open_owner4s. This patch adds a mount option called "oneopenown" that
can be used for NFSv4.1 mounts to make the client do all Opens with the
same open_owner4 string. This option can only be used with NFSv4.1 and
may not work correctly when Delegations are is use.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D8988

MFC: r259084
For software builds, the NFS client does many small
synchronous (with FILE_SYNC) writes because non-contiguous
byte ranges in the same buffer cache block are being
written. This patch adds a new mount option "noncontigwr"
which allows the non-contiguous byte ranges to be combined,
with the dirty byte range becoming the superset of the bytes
that are dirty, if the file has not been file locked.
This reduces the number of writes significantly for software
builds. The only case where this change might break existing
applications is where an application is writing
non-overlapping byte ranges within the same buffer cache block
of a file from multiple clients concurrently.
Since such an application would normally do file locking on
the file, avoiding the byte range merge for files that have
been file locked should be sufficient for most (maybe all?) cases.

MFC: r259084
For software builds, the NFS client does many small
synchronous (with FILE_SYNC) writes because non-contiguous
byte ranges in the same buffer cache block are being
written. This patch adds a new mount option "noncontigwr"
which allows the non-contiguous byte ranges to be combined,
with the dirty byte range becoming the superset of the bytes
that are dirty, if the file has not been file locked.
This reduces the number of writes significantly for software
builds. The only case where this change might break existing
applications is where an application is writing
non-overlapping byte ranges within the same buffer cache block
of a file from multiple clients concurrently.
Since such an application would normally do file locking on
the file, avoiding the byte range merge for files that have
been file locked should be sufficient for most (maybe all?) cases.