On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 4:11 PM, Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you like these kind of consolidation patches here's another one:
Merged into cifs-2.6.git tree
--
Thanks,
Steve
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message
The patch looks fine - but since it does not set obj_type any more - I
want to think about it a little more since it may be useful coming
back from the open path (although the mode is probably good enough).
jra added support to Samba for a new POSIX open/create/mkdir request
(which we only use for
On Sat, Feb 16, 2008 at 11:51:52AM +0300, Q wrote:
> At first glance cifs_get_inode_info_remote won't work cause it's old dfs
> code not new one. But I caught what Christoph meant now, and will try to
> rewrite it this way.
Yes, this was supposed to be a refactoring of the existing code. By
doing
-Original Message-
From: "Steve French" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Christoph Hellwig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 15:02:19 -0600
Subject: Re: [linux-cifs-client] review 5, was Re: projected date for
mount.cifs to support DFS junction po
If you like these kind of consolidation patches here's another one:
Index: linux-2.6/fs/cifs/inode.c
===
--- linux-2.6.orig/fs/cifs/inode.c 2008-02-15 22:46:08.0 +0100
+++ linux-2.6/fs/cifs/inode.c 2008-02-15 23:09:28.
On 2/15/08, Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 07:37:35PM +0300, Q (Igor Mammedov) wrote:
> > Here is what I've done the last weekend.
> > Attached:
> > fixed patch [5/5]
> (0001-DFS-patch-that-connects-inode-with-dfs-handling-ops.patch).
Not merged yet.
>
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 07:37:35PM +0300, Q (Igor Mammedov) wrote:
> Sorry guys, but I have a lot of work for the last 3 weeks,
> so I couldn't spare much time for a hobby and react quickly.
No problem. I know this problem very well as almost all of my core
kernel contributions are spare time as
Sorry guys, but I have a lot of work for the last 3 weeks,
so I couldn't spare much time for a hobby and react quickly.
Here is what I've done the last weekend.
Attached:
fixed patch [5/5]
(0001-DFS-patch-that-connects-inode-with-dfs-handling-ops.patch).
fixed mixed case in struct member
(0002
On Feb 7, 2008 12:25 PM, Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> and while I'm at it a lot of the non-DFS additions to cifs aren't quite
> up to standards for kernel code either, lots of useless braces, wierd
> coding style and ifdef mania.
Reducing "ifdef mania" would help (there are about
On Feb 7, 2008 12:25 PM, Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 07:43:01AM -0600, Steve French wrote:
> > I only remember missing a loop unwinding on exit style comment of
> > yours that was not addressed in what got integrated. I will go back
> > through your notes
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 07:43:01AM -0600, Steve French wrote:
> I only remember missing a loop unwinding on exit style comment of
> yours that was not addressed in what got integrated. I will go back
> through your notes again to see if I missed one.
- there's still all that CONFIG_CIFS_DFS_UPCA
I only remember missing a loop unwinding on exit style comment of
yours that was not addressed in what got integrated. I will go back
through your notes again to see if I missed one.
I meant to merge the final patch last week but ran out of time. Will
try to finish that this week.
On Feb 5, 200
On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 09:07:49AM +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> If you want to get it into 2.6.25 get it out for review on -fsdevel
> ASAP. 2.6.24 is almost done and it needs to be in acceptable state
> before 2.6.25 opens.
So I've done an extensive review now, but the patches (or rather an
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 04:15:05PM +0300, Q (Igor Mammedov) wrote:
> > + dput(nd->dentry);
> > + nd->dentry = dget(dentry);
> > + if (d_mountpoint(nd->dentry))
> > + goto out_follow;
> >
> > A link should never be a mountpoint.
>
> why link? after patch 5 are applied DFS junction
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> [David, any chance you could look at the suggestion below to refactor
> the automount from ->follow_link code into a common helper now that
> we've grown a second copy from it]
>
>
> +cifs_dfs_follow_mountpoint(struct dentry *dentry, struct nameidata *nd)
> +{
> +
I agree that CIFSGetDFSRefer needs to be reworked to be easier to
read. This was one of the reasons that I wanted to look at this
particular patch more.
On Jan 13, 2008 1:48 PM, Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- a/fs/cifs/cifssmb.c
> +++ b/fs/cifs/cifssmb.c
> @@ -3879,8 +3879,8 @
On Jan 13, 2008 1:40 PM, Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Unfortunately I couldn't find an mbox archive of the cifs client list
> anywhere, so I'll send you the review in reply to this mail, with
> one reply per patch.
>
> + * This library is free software; you can redistribute it
+#ifdef CONFIG_CIFS_DFS_UPCALL
+ if (is_remote) {
+ inode->i_op =
+ &cifs_dfs_referral_inode_operations;
+ inode->i_fop = NULL;
i_fop should never be set to NULL. Just leave it
[David, any chance you could look at the suggestion below to refactor
the automount from ->follow_link code into a common helper now that
we've grown a second copy from it]
+ if (cifs_sb->tcon->Flags & 0x2) {
Please don't use magic numbers but symbolic defines.
+static void*
static vo
+#ifdef CONFIG_CIFS_DFS_UPCALL
+ /* copy mount params to sb for use in submounts */
+ /* BB: should we move this after the mount so we
+* do not have to do the copy on failed mounts?
+* BB: May be it is better to do simple copy before
+* complex operation (mount)
+struct dfs_info3_param {
+ int flags; /* DFSREF_REFERRAL_SERVER, DFSREF_STORAGE_SERVER*/
+ int PathConsumed;
+ int server_type;
+ int ref_flag;
+ char *path_name;
+ char *node_name;
+};
Please avoid mixed case struct member names.
+
+static inline void init_df
Unfortunately I couldn't find an mbox archive of the cifs client list
anywhere, so I'll send you the review in reply to this mail, with
one reply per patch.
This is for the first patch:
+ * fs/cifs/cifs_dfs_ref.c
Please don't mention file names in top of file comments, they serve no
use and g
Igor's overview of the patch series is:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-cifs-client&r=1&b=200712&w=2
Although most of the CIFS DFS support is merged, there are three
remaining patches to finish review before merge. One, for completing
CIFSGetDFSReferral, is probably less interesting to fsdevel:
http://
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 02:28:40PM -0600, Steve French wrote:
> > to CIFS not supporting DFS junction points. Any projected date for that
> > to be supported?
>
> I anticipate that it will make Linux kernel 2.6.25 (marked
> experimental) and eventually in a cifs version 1.53 backported for
> olde
> to CIFS not supporting DFS junction points. Any projected date for that
> to be supported?
I anticipate that it will make Linux kernel 2.6.25 (marked
experimental) and eventually in a cifs version 1.53 backported for
older kernels.
Most of the support required for CIFS DFS for the Linux client
25 matches
Mail list logo
