; 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 to
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 bin
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
.
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
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 -
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
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
> > >
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
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
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
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
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
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.
Before these can become useful, we must first cover each place in the VFS
where writes are performed with a want/drop pair.
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.
Before these can become useful, we must first cover each place in the VFS
where writes are performed with a want/drop pair.
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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.
Before these can become useful, we must first cover each place in the VFS
where writes are performed with a want/drop pair.
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.
Before these can become useful, we must first cover each place in the VFS
where writes are performed with a want/drop pair.
22 matches
Mail list logo
