lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: compat: autofs v5 packet size ambiguity - update
From
Date
On Wed, 2012-02-22 at 22:31 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> However, I liked Linus' approach.of using the version ioctl; any reason not to?

Not really, although that ioctl is used it doesn't have to be but you
must mount the autofs file system to use it. Setting a timeout is
another ioctl that is almost mandatory although not using it amounts to
saying you don't want anything to expire which is valid.

>
> Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net> wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 2012-02-23 at 10:21 +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2012-02-23 at 09:54 +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 2012-02-23 at 09:48 +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
> >> > > On Wed, 2012-02-22 at 08:12 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >> > > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>
> >wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Oh, DOH ...
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > The process mounting the autofs mount is passing the pipe it
> >will use
> >> > > > > for communication via a mount option so we can do this right
> >in
> >> > > > > fill_super.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > No, we really cannot.
> >> > >
> >> > > Sorry, I think your wrong this time.
> >> >
> >> > On second thought, I suppose other user space users don't "have" to
> >use
> >> > mount(2) ....
> >>
> >> Thomas, what does systemd use to mount the autofs mounts that it
> >uses?
> >
> >Mmm ... AFAICS systemd uses mount(2) so that looks OK too.
> >
> >Ian
>




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-02-23 12:23    [W:0.079 / U:0.652 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site