Re: [PATCH] cifs: guard against hardlinking directories
Steve French <[email protected]> Tue, 11 May 2010 15:42:26 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.file-systems.cifs |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 11 May 2010 13:43:27 -0500 > Steve French <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Tue, 11 May 2010 12:15:51 -0500 >> > Steve French <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> Merged into cifs-2.6.git - if the branch for-linus does not look >> >> weird/broken, plan to request upstream tonight. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > I just made some comments on this to the bug: >> > >> > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7407#c13 >> > >> > ...I wonder whether this patch may be too aggressive about disabling >> > serverino. It seems like we ought to be OK with finding an inode that >> > is "floating", just not one that has a dentry already attached. >> > Thoughts? >> > >> > -- >> > Jeff Layton <[email protected]> >> > >> >> I agree - but have to deal with the oops first ASAP - narrow it later. >> > > I tend to agree -- disabling server inode numbers unnecessarily is > better than oopsing at umount. I did just test the attached modified > patch however and it fixes the reproducer I have for this. Thoughts on > going with this instead? Isn't this patch the same as the one you sent this morning? What changed? -- Thanks, Steve