Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 19 Jan 2009 12:24:47 -0600 | From | "Serge E. Hallyn" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] autofs: fix the wrong usage of the deprecated task_pgrp_nr() |
| |
Quoting Oleg Nesterov (oleg@redhat.com): > On 01/19, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > > > Quoting Oleg Nesterov (oleg@redhat.com): > > > On 01/19, Ian Kent wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 13:42 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Before the patch > > > > > > > > > > sbi->oz_pgrp != task_pgrp(automount) > > > > > > > > > > After the patch > > > > > > > > > > sbi->oz_pgrp == task_pgrp(automount) > > > > > > > > > > And please note that these "!="/"==" apply to any namespace. I mean, > > > > > when we call autofs_oz_mode() it does not matter in which namespace > > > > > autofs_oz_mode() is executed, we compare "struct pid*", not pid_t. > > > > > > > > I think your saying that the option pgrp= is broken and should be > > > > deprecated > > > > > > No, no, sorry if I confused you. > > > > > > If the "pgrp=" option was specified, the patch has no effect, and the > > > code is correct with or without the patch. > > > > But so there does still need to be a patch modifying parse_options() > > to return an error if pgrp= was not specified, right? > > Why? In that case we should use the caller's pgrp. This is what the > current tries to do, why should the patch change this behaviour?
Well, because Ian said that not specifying it is supposed to be an error :) I didn't quite understand why, so am fishing for more info...
-serge
| |