shrinking set of cifs fixes to merge for 2.6.39 to small set

shrinking set of cifs fixes to merge for 2.6.39 to small set

[Steve French]

Since it is already past the merge window (was waiting to discuss some
fixes with others at the fs summit last week before merge),  I shrunk
the list of cifs patches waiting for merge (in cifs-2.6.git) to a much
smaller set of more critical ones. See below. (I moved the others
temporarily to a for-2.6.40 branch in cifs-2.6.git).  We (Jeff,
Shirish, I etc.) need to build/test more with this set before sending
though.

Jeff Layton (8):
      cifs: check for private_data before trying to put it
      cifs: replace /proc/fs/cifs/Experimental with a module parm
      cifs: always do is_path_accessible check in cifs_mount
      cifs: fix broken BCC check in is_valid_oplock_break
      cifs: set ra_pages in backing_dev_info
      cifs: clean up length checks in check2ndT2
      cifs: clean up various nits in unicode routines (try #2)
      cifs: wrap received signature check in srv_mutex

Steve French (6):
      Allow user names longer than 32 bytes
      Max share size is too small
      Elminate sparse __CHECK_ENDIAN__ warnings on port conversion
      various endian fixes to cifs
      [CIFS] cifs: clarify the meaning of tcpStatus == CifsGood
      [CIFS] Warn on requesting default security (ntlm) on mount





-- 
Thanks,

Steve

Re: shrinking set of cifs fixes to merge for 2.6.39 to small set

[Jeff Layton]

On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 20:33:42 -0500
Steve French <smfrench@gmail.com> wrote:

> Since it is already past the merge window (was waiting to discuss some
> fixes with others at the fs summit last week before merge),  I shrunk
> the list of cifs patches waiting for merge (in cifs-2.6.git) to a much
> smaller set of more critical ones. See below. (I moved the others
> temporarily to a for-2.6.40 branch in cifs-2.6.git).  We (Jeff,
> Shirish, I etc.) need to build/test more with this set before sending
> though.
> 
> Jeff Layton (8):
>       cifs: check for private_data before trying to put it
>       cifs: replace /proc/fs/cifs/Experimental with a module parm

	I think we should also put in the patch that adds the
	page_mkwrite handler. Otherwise, we'll be adding an interface
	(new module parm) that we're just going to rip out later.

>       cifs: always do is_path_accessible check in cifs_mount
>       cifs: fix broken BCC check in is_valid_oplock_break
>       cifs: set ra_pages in backing_dev_info
>       cifs: clean up length checks in check2ndT2
>       cifs: clean up various nits in unicode routines (try #2)
>       cifs: wrap received signature check in srv_mutex
> 
> Steve French (6):
>       Allow user names longer than 32 bytes
>       Max share size is too small
>       Elminate sparse __CHECK_ENDIAN__ warnings on port conversion
>       various endian fixes to cifs
>       [CIFS] cifs: clarify the meaning of tcpStatus == CifsGood
>       [CIFS] Warn on requesting default security (ntlm) on mount
> 
> 

Other than that, this looks like a reasonable set. I'll plan to build
it later today and give it some testing.

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>

Re: shrinking set of cifs fixes to merge for 2.6.39 to small set

[Steve French]

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 6:51 AM, Jeff Layton <jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 20:33:42 -0500
> Steve French <smfrench-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>> Since it is already past the merge window (was waiting to discuss some
>> fixes with others at the fs summit last week before merge),  I shrunk
>> the list of cifs patches waiting for merge (in cifs-2.6.git) to a much
>> smaller set of more critical ones. See below. (I moved the others
>> temporarily to a for-2.6.40 branch in cifs-2.6.git).  We (Jeff,
>> Shirish, I etc.) need to build/test more with this set before sending
>> though.
>>
>> Jeff Layton (8):
>>       cifs: check for private_data before trying to put it
>>       cifs: replace /proc/fs/cifs/Experimental with a module parm
>
>        I think we should also put in the patch that adds the
>        page_mkwrite handler.

I agree but it had more merge conflicts.

>
> Other than that, this looks like a reasonable set. I'll plan to build
> it later today and give it some testing.
>
> --
> Jeff Layton <jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
>



-- 
Thanks,

Steve

Re: shrinking set of cifs fixes to merge for 2.6.39 to small set

[Jeff Layton]

On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 07:30:14 -0500
Steve French <smfrench-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 6:51 AM, Jeff Layton <jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 20:33:42 -0500
> > Steve French <smfrench-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Since it is already past the merge window (was waiting to discuss some
> >> fixes with others at the fs summit last week before merge),  I shrunk
> >> the list of cifs patches waiting for merge (in cifs-2.6.git) to a much
> >> smaller set of more critical ones. See below. (I moved the others
> >> temporarily to a for-2.6.40 branch in cifs-2.6.git).  We (Jeff,
> >> Shirish, I etc.) need to build/test more with this set before sending
> >> though.
> >>
> >> Jeff Layton (8):
> >>       cifs: check for private_data before trying to put it
> >>       cifs: replace /proc/fs/cifs/Experimental with a module parm
> >
> >        I think we should also put in the patch that adds the
> >        page_mkwrite handler.
> 
> I agree but it had more merge conflicts.
> 

Ok, I just resent the patch with the merge conflicts fixed.

I've also given the set you're proposing + the page_mkwrite patch a
quick smoke test run with connectathon and it seems to be ok.

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>