Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 02:25:52PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 07:31 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > once we put pieces in the first three patches would be useful aswell, > > to easily catch additions in the next cycle that might be adding > > NULL-vfsmount calls to dentry_open. > > So, we want > > "[PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions" > and > "[PATCH 03/30] check for null vfsmount in dentry_open()" For that latter patch we'd need the reiserfs and hpps fixes. But I think it's too late now, let's just keep them in -mm for the time beeing. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 07:31 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > once we put pieces in the first three patches would be useful aswell, > to easily catch additions in the next cycle that might be adding > NULL-vfsmount calls to dentry_open. So, we want "[PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions" and "[PATCH 03/30] check for null vfsmount in dentry_open()" But what's the third patch? -- Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 07:31 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: once we put pieces in the first three patches would be useful aswell, to easily catch additions in the next cycle that might be adding NULL-vfsmount calls to dentry_open. So, we want [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions and [PATCH 03/30] check for null vfsmount in dentry_open() But what's the third patch? -- Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 02:25:52PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 07:31 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: once we put pieces in the first three patches would be useful aswell, to easily catch additions in the next cycle that might be adding NULL-vfsmount calls to dentry_open. So, we want [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions and [PATCH 03/30] check for null vfsmount in dentry_open() For that latter patch we'd need the reiserfs and hpps fixes. But I think it's too late now, let's just keep them in -mm for the time beeing. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 22:46 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > hrm, well, how about putting up a complete and suitably-changelogged patch > series for Linus to look at? That's be a Dave thing I guess. I'll look at it on Wednesday. I'm offline until then. > I wasn't overawed by the initial patch - why not make those stubs inlined > to truly add zero cost?? What I sent was the exact same thing I had from the original patch series. They weren't inlined because shortly after that in the series, we make them much bigger. Merging that exact patch is the easiest for me, but I see your point. I'll rework it with the others. -- Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 22:46 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: hrm, well, how about putting up a complete and suitably-changelogged patch series for Linus to look at? That's be a Dave thing I guess. I'll look at it on Wednesday. I'm offline until then. I wasn't overawed by the initial patch - why not make those stubs inlined to truly add zero cost?? What I sent was the exact same thing I had from the original patch series. They weren't inlined because shortly after that in the series, we make them much bigger. Merging that exact patch is the easiest for me, but I see your point. I'll rework it with the others. -- Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 07:31:29 +0100 Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 05:11:19PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > It would be nice if an initial patch which introduces the new > > > functionality you need for r/o bind mounts could get introduced into > > > mainline *first*, and then people could add patches that call > > > mnt_want_write(), et. al into their trees gradually. > > > > Yes, I expect that merging a handful of do-nothing mnt_foo_write() > > functions into mainline right now would ease life. > > > > > otherwise akpm gets grumpy > > > > itym "less than usually cheery" > > Haha, > > once we put pieces in the first three patches would be useful aswell, > to easily catch additions in the next cycle that might be adding > NULL-vfsmount calls to dentry_open. hrm, well, how about putting up a complete and suitably-changelogged patch series for Linus to look at? That's be a Dave thing I guess. I wasn't overawed by the initial patch - why not make those stubs inlined to truly add zero cost?? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 05:11:19PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > It would be nice if an initial patch which introduces the new > > functionality you need for r/o bind mounts could get introduced into > > mainline *first*, and then people could add patches that call > > mnt_want_write(), et. al into their trees gradually. > > Yes, I expect that merging a handful of do-nothing mnt_foo_write() > functions into mainline right now would ease life. > > > otherwise akpm gets grumpy > > itym "less than usually cheery" Haha, once we put pieces in the first three patches would be useful aswell, to easily catch additions in the next cycle that might be adding NULL-vfsmount calls to dentry_open. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:00:30 -0500 Theodore Tso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 04:49:39PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > > On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 19:32 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 02:37:30PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > > > > > > > > This patch adds two function mnt_want_write() and mnt_drop_write(). > > > > These are used like a lock pair around and fs operations that might > > > > cause a write to the filesystem. > > > > > > Argh, is there some reason why this couldn't have gotten merged in > > > -rc1, ahead of the rest of the patch series? This one is going to > > > cause more cross-tree merge pain with any filesystem tree that have > > > changes to fs/*/ioctl.c. > > > > I wasn't meaning for this to hit the 2.6.25-rc series. We had some > > review comments just when the merge window opened, and I was expecting > > them to get stuck back in -mm for another round. > > Yeah, but it means that I need one set of patches for -mm, and another > set of patches for Linus's mainline. I notice that your patchset is > currently missing changes for fs/ext4/ioctl.c --- I think because you > dropped them when Mingming picked them up, and then I dropped them > when I was trying to prepare the set of patches to push to Linus. > > No problem, I'm sure I can ressurect them, but it's still the same > basic problem that when there are patchsets such as yours which touch > multiple trees in -mm, there are almost inevitably patch conflicts. > > It would be nice if an initial patch which introduces the new > functionality you need for r/o bind mounts could get introduced into > mainline *first*, and then people could add patches that call > mnt_want_write(), et. al into their trees gradually. Yes, I expect that merging a handful of do-nothing mnt_foo_write() functions into mainline right now would ease life. > otherwise akpm gets grumpy itym "less than usually cheery" -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 04:49:39PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 19:32 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 02:37:30PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > > > > > > This patch adds two function mnt_want_write() and mnt_drop_write(). > > > These are used like a lock pair around and fs operations that might > > > cause a write to the filesystem. > > > > Argh, is there some reason why this couldn't have gotten merged in > > -rc1, ahead of the rest of the patch series? This one is going to > > cause more cross-tree merge pain with any filesystem tree that have > > changes to fs/*/ioctl.c. > > I wasn't meaning for this to hit the 2.6.25-rc series. We had some > review comments just when the merge window opened, and I was expecting > them to get stuck back in -mm for another round. Yeah, but it means that I need one set of patches for -mm, and another set of patches for Linus's mainline. I notice that your patchset is currently missing changes for fs/ext4/ioctl.c --- I think because you dropped them when Mingming picked them up, and then I dropped them when I was trying to prepare the set of patches to push to Linus. No problem, I'm sure I can ressurect them, but it's still the same basic problem that when there are patchsets such as yours which touch multiple trees in -mm, there are almost inevitably patch conflicts. It would be nice if an initial patch which introduces the new functionality you need for r/o bind mounts could get introduced into mainline *first*, and then people could add patches that call mnt_want_write(), et. al into their trees gradually. As it is, I can't see a way around this other than maintaining two separate patch sets, one that works with r/o bind mounts, and one for mainline, since otherwise akpm gets grumpy and starts dropping either your patchset or the ext4 patchset because *he* has to manually fix up the patch conflicts. (So instead I have to deal with it by hand, and then *I* get grumpy. :-/) - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 19:32 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 02:37:30PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > > > > This patch adds two function mnt_want_write() and mnt_drop_write(). > > These are used like a lock pair around and fs operations that might > > cause a write to the filesystem. > > Argh, is there some reason why this couldn't have gotten merged in > -rc1, ahead of the rest of the patch series? This one is going to > cause more cross-tree merge pain with any filesystem tree that have > changes to fs/*/ioctl.c. I wasn't meaning for this to hit the 2.6.25-rc series. We had some review comments just when the merge window opened, and I was expecting them to get stuck back in -mm for another round. -- Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 02:37:30PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > > This patch adds two function mnt_want_write() and mnt_drop_write(). > These are used like a lock pair around and fs operations that might > cause a write to the filesystem. Argh, is there some reason why this couldn't have gotten merged in -rc1, ahead of the rest of the patch series? This one is going to cause more cross-tree merge pain with any filesystem tree that have changes to fs/*/ioctl.c. - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 02:37:30PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: This patch adds two function mnt_want_write() and mnt_drop_write(). These are used like a lock pair around and fs operations that might cause a write to the filesystem. Argh, is there some reason why this couldn't have gotten merged in -rc1, ahead of the rest of the patch series? This one is going to cause more cross-tree merge pain with any filesystem tree that have changes to fs/*/ioctl.c. - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 19:32 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 02:37:30PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: This patch adds two function mnt_want_write() and mnt_drop_write(). These are used like a lock pair around and fs operations that might cause a write to the filesystem. Argh, is there some reason why this couldn't have gotten merged in -rc1, ahead of the rest of the patch series? This one is going to cause more cross-tree merge pain with any filesystem tree that have changes to fs/*/ioctl.c. I wasn't meaning for this to hit the 2.6.25-rc series. We had some review comments just when the merge window opened, and I was expecting them to get stuck back in -mm for another round. -- Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 04:49:39PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 19:32 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 02:37:30PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: This patch adds two function mnt_want_write() and mnt_drop_write(). These are used like a lock pair around and fs operations that might cause a write to the filesystem. Argh, is there some reason why this couldn't have gotten merged in -rc1, ahead of the rest of the patch series? This one is going to cause more cross-tree merge pain with any filesystem tree that have changes to fs/*/ioctl.c. I wasn't meaning for this to hit the 2.6.25-rc series. We had some review comments just when the merge window opened, and I was expecting them to get stuck back in -mm for another round. Yeah, but it means that I need one set of patches for -mm, and another set of patches for Linus's mainline. I notice that your patchset is currently missing changes for fs/ext4/ioctl.c --- I think because you dropped them when Mingming picked them up, and then I dropped them when I was trying to prepare the set of patches to push to Linus. No problem, I'm sure I can ressurect them, but it's still the same basic problem that when there are patchsets such as yours which touch multiple trees in -mm, there are almost inevitably patch conflicts. It would be nice if an initial patch which introduces the new functionality you need for r/o bind mounts could get introduced into mainline *first*, and then people could add patches that call mnt_want_write(), et. al into their trees gradually. As it is, I can't see a way around this other than maintaining two separate patch sets, one that works with r/o bind mounts, and one for mainline, since otherwise akpm gets grumpy and starts dropping either your patchset or the ext4 patchset because *he* has to manually fix up the patch conflicts. (So instead I have to deal with it by hand, and then *I* get grumpy. :-/) - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:00:30 -0500 Theodore Tso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 04:49:39PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 19:32 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 02:37:30PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: This patch adds two function mnt_want_write() and mnt_drop_write(). These are used like a lock pair around and fs operations that might cause a write to the filesystem. Argh, is there some reason why this couldn't have gotten merged in -rc1, ahead of the rest of the patch series? This one is going to cause more cross-tree merge pain with any filesystem tree that have changes to fs/*/ioctl.c. I wasn't meaning for this to hit the 2.6.25-rc series. We had some review comments just when the merge window opened, and I was expecting them to get stuck back in -mm for another round. Yeah, but it means that I need one set of patches for -mm, and another set of patches for Linus's mainline. I notice that your patchset is currently missing changes for fs/ext4/ioctl.c --- I think because you dropped them when Mingming picked them up, and then I dropped them when I was trying to prepare the set of patches to push to Linus. No problem, I'm sure I can ressurect them, but it's still the same basic problem that when there are patchsets such as yours which touch multiple trees in -mm, there are almost inevitably patch conflicts. It would be nice if an initial patch which introduces the new functionality you need for r/o bind mounts could get introduced into mainline *first*, and then people could add patches that call mnt_want_write(), et. al into their trees gradually. Yes, I expect that merging a handful of do-nothing mnt_foo_write() functions into mainline right now would ease life. otherwise akpm gets grumpy itym less than usually cheery -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 05:11:19PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: It would be nice if an initial patch which introduces the new functionality you need for r/o bind mounts could get introduced into mainline *first*, and then people could add patches that call mnt_want_write(), et. al into their trees gradually. Yes, I expect that merging a handful of do-nothing mnt_foo_write() functions into mainline right now would ease life. otherwise akpm gets grumpy itym less than usually cheery Haha, once we put pieces in the first three patches would be useful aswell, to easily catch additions in the next cycle that might be adding NULL-vfsmount calls to dentry_open. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 07/30] r/o bind mounts: stub functions
On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 07:31:29 +0100 Christoph Hellwig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 05:11:19PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: It would be nice if an initial patch which introduces the new functionality you need for r/o bind mounts could get introduced into mainline *first*, and then people could add patches that call mnt_want_write(), et. al into their trees gradually. Yes, I expect that merging a handful of do-nothing mnt_foo_write() functions into mainline right now would ease life. otherwise akpm gets grumpy itym less than usually cheery Haha, once we put pieces in the first three patches would be useful aswell, to easily catch additions in the next cycle that might be adding NULL-vfsmount calls to dentry_open. hrm, well, how about putting up a complete and suitably-changelogged patch series for Linus to look at? That's be a Dave thing I guess. I wasn't overawed by the initial patch - why not make those stubs inlined to truly add zero cost?? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
