lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jul]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 6/7] autofs4 - use struct qstr in waitq.c
    On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 13:08:40 +0800 Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net> wrote:

    >
    > On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 16:13 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > > On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 20:24:06 +0800
    > > Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net> wrote:
    > >
    > > > From: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
    > > >
    > > > The autofs_wait_queue already contains all of the fields of the
    > > > struct qstr, so change it into a qstr.
    > > >
    > > > This patch, from Jeff Moyer, has been modified a liitle by myself.
    > > >
    > > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
    > > > Signed-off-by: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>
    > >
    > > So this patch which had been happily sitting in -mm for a month has
    > > suddenly broken because linux-next's three-day-old
    > > 4bce7ce7c7d0d57b78dacc3a2bd87ec63b2d9b4c has removed LOOKUP_ACCESS.
    > >
    > > This is suboptimal.
    > >
    > > Now what do I do?
    >
    > Ummm .. I'm confused.
    >
    > Your patch autofs4-use-lookup-intent-flags-to-trigger-mounts-fix.patch
    > allows the linux-next kernel to build with all the autofs4 patches
    > currently posted for inclusion in mm but the patch you mention here
    > isn't concerned with the lookup flags?

    Yeah, I picked the wrong patch to reply to.

    > The removal of LOOKUP_ACCESS is quite interesting. AFAIKS it effectively
    > prevents the patch
    > autofs4-use-lookup-intent-flags-to-trigger-mounts.patch from also
    > resolving an issue with recursive autofs mounts while still resolving
    > the issue that the patch was actually meant to address.
    >
    > It's hard to get exited about the former issue as Al Viro has NACKed a
    > previous patch that added the LOOKUP_ACCESS check, indicating the
    > availability of the lookup flags will be changing. Also there is a
    > question as to whether autofs will support the use mount points in
    > automount maps that themselves refer to an automount path (the recursive
    > bit).

    So what do we do?

    Seems that a great pile of newish-looking stuff hit the vfs tree yesterday.
    Al, is that material supposed to be going into 2.6.27?



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-07-23 07:21    [W:0.111 / U:0.416 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site