From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
hpa@zytor.com, Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>,
Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] autofs: fix the wrong usage of the deprecated task_pgrp_nr()
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 20:17:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090119191729.GB24852@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090119182447.GA15140@us.ibm.com>
On 01/19, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>
> Quoting Oleg Nesterov (oleg@redhat.com):
> > On 01/19, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > >
> > > But so there does still need to be a patch modifying parse_options()
> > > to return an error if pgrp= was not specified, right?
> >
> > Why? In that case we should use the caller's pgrp. This is what the
> > current tries to do, why should the patch change this behaviour?
>
> Well, because Ian said that not specifying it is supposed to
> be an error :) I didn't quite understand why, so am fishing
> for more info...
I think you misunderstood him. Or I am totally confused ;)
In any case. Both autofs and autofs4 use current's pgrp if this
option was not specified, and these patches doesn't change this
behaviour.
Actually, I am very much surprized this one-liner patch has so
many questions. Isn't it "obiously correct" ?
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-19 19:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-18 7:34 [PATCH] autofs: fix the wrong usage of the deprecated task_pgrp_nr() Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 2:20 ` Ian Kent
2009-01-19 6:35 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-01-19 7:45 ` Ian Kent
2009-01-19 17:09 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-01-20 1:18 ` Ian Kent
2009-01-19 7:08 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 8:11 ` Ian Kent
2009-01-19 8:32 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 11:15 ` Ian Kent
2009-01-19 12:42 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 13:33 ` Ian Kent
2009-01-19 14:30 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 17:48 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-01-19 18:05 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 18:24 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-01-19 19:17 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2009-01-19 19:20 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-01-19 19:32 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 19:35 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-01-19 20:04 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 20:48 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-01-19 21:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 22:11 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-01-20 2:07 ` Ian Kent
2009-01-20 1:35 ` Ian Kent
2009-01-20 1:38 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-01-20 7:08 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-23 4:48 ` Ian Kent
2009-01-23 8:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-23 9:09 ` Ian Kent
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=20090119191729.GB24852@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=raven@themaw.net \
--cc=serue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=xemul@openvz.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