Re: [PATCH 1/3] autofs4 - fix device ioctl mount lookup

[Jeff Layton]

On Fri, 06 Sep 2013 16:54:19 +0800
Ian Kent <raven@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> Sorry, I should have added Jeff to the cc for this post.
> 
> On Fri, 2013-09-06 at 16:38 +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-09-04 at 03:42 +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 03:26:17AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > > > I've applied slightly modified variant of Jeff's "vfs: allow umount to handle
> > > > mountpoints without revalidating them" (modified by just leaving the
> > > > struct path filled with mountpoint and leaving the equivalent of follow_mount()
> > > > to caller) to the local queue and I'm pretty sure that it's what we want
> > > > here as well.
> > > 
> > > ... and killed the modifications since the result ends up uglier for
> > > caller(s) anyway.  Reapplied as-is.
> > 
> > Looks like Jeff's patch has been merged, commit 8033426e6.
> > 
> > Revalidation isn't the only thing not done on the last component using
> > Jeff's user_path_umountat() path walk. It also bypasses the managed
> > dentry code for the last component, which is why it's what I need as
> > well.
> > 
> > Encoding umount in the name seems misleading as to what it really does
> > as would encoding unmanaged or similar since that doesn't properly cover
> > it either.
> > 
> > I can rename it in a patch to solve my autofs problem, so how about
> > something like user_path_simple_last(), other suggestions anyone?
> > 
> > Ian
> 
> 

Since the purpose is to find mountpoints, maybe user_path_mntpoint()?

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/