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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).