From: Steve Dickson <SteveD@redhat.com>
To: "Myklebust, Trond" <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
Cc: Linux NFS Mailing list <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] umount.nfs: normalize path names during umounts.
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 19:53:27 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F556007.2030603@RedHat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1330993903.5407.3.camel@lade.trondhjem.org>
On 03/05/2012 07:31 PM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 19:27 -0500, Steve Dickson wrote:
>>
>> On 03/05/2012 04:20 PM, Malahal Naineni wrote:
>>> Steve Dickson [steved@redhat.com] wrote:
>>>
>>> Also, when you normalize, why not go the extra mile of doing it all the
>>> way as the patch I posted? I wanted to cover specs like
>>> "host:/server/../home/./blah". This patch only does partial
>>> normalization. The original patch also normalizes /proc/mount entry's
>>> pathname (this avoids dealing with trailing '/' hack that exists now).
>> I just do not see the need for that type of complexity... Maybe I'm
>> being a bit naive, but I see two problems here. One, v4 mounts
>> with multiple slashes and two v4 mounts without any slashes...
>>
>> Now both of our patches do address those issues but mine only
>> addresses those issues and no, it does not go the "extra mile"
>> of addressing '..' in path names, but does it need to? Is
>> there really an use case where people export things with ".."
>> in the path?
>>
>> Sometimes going the just extra mile just brings more pain...
>> for no reason... and believe me I'm no runner... 8-)
>
> Note that the NFSv4 server may have symlinks and/or referrals in the
> mount path, in which case it is game over for this kind of approach
> anyway: you can't 'normalise' your way to interpreting that...
Well I guess we will cross that bridge when we get there... At
this point I just want fixes these two bugs and move on...
>
> Is there any reason why we actually care about checking the crap
> in /etc/mtab on umount?
>
Yeah... its called backwards compatibility with older distros...
Believe, if I could bury mtab I would... in a New York minute!
I just don't see it happening...
steved.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-06 0:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-05 19:36 [PATCH 0/1] Normalized path names on umounts (take 2) Steve Dickson
2012-03-05 19:36 ` [PATCH 1/1] umount.nfs: normalize path names during umounts Steve Dickson
2012-03-05 21:20 ` Malahal Naineni
2012-03-05 21:30 ` Malahal Naineni
2012-03-06 0:28 ` Steve Dickson
2012-03-06 0:27 ` Steve Dickson
2012-03-06 0:31 ` Myklebust, Trond
2012-03-06 0:53 ` Steve Dickson [this message]
2012-03-06 1:04 ` Myklebust, Trond
2012-03-06 1:35 ` Steve Dickson
2012-03-06 1:52 ` Jim Rees
2012-03-06 2:25 ` Malahal Naineni
2012-03-06 2:38 ` Steve Dickson
2012-03-05 19:37 ` [PATCH 0/1] Normalized path names on umounts (take 2) Chuck Lever
2012-03-05 19:44 ` Steve Dickson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4F556007.2030603@RedHat.com \
--to=steved@redhat.com \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.