On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 13:25, Ram wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-05-21 at 06:12, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > Ok. look at the enclosed patch. Does it look any better? The special
> > > casing for detached mounts ate up some brain cells and made the code
> > > less simpler.
> > 
> > Yes, this isn't trivial stuff.
> > 
> > I realized one more thing: nd->mnt (the destination vfsmount) might be
> > detached while waiting for the semaphore.  So that needs to be
> > rechecked after taking the semaphores.
> 
> Ok. fixed that. that was surprisingly trivial though initially it looked
> like some complex locking.
> 
> > 
> > And the same for old_nd->mnt in case of rbind.  Though I'm
> > not sure what the semantics should be in this case:
> > 
> >   1) rbind always fails if the source is detached
> >   2) rbind always succeeds, and if the source is detached it just
> >      copies that single mount
> 
> > I like 2) better.  Is there anything against it?
> 
> sure. as much functionality as we can get. I have incorporated (2).
> 
> Take a look at the enclosed patch,
 
The patch failed rbinds in some cases. Fixed it. The enclosed patch
has a high chance of being bug free.

RP


> RP
> > 
> > Miklos
> > -
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html