linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [RFC] MS_VERBOSE handling in get_sb_bdev()
@ 2004-10-14 16:06 Alex Zarochentsev
  2004-10-14 18:50 ` Randy.Dunlap
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Alex Zarochentsev @ 2004-10-14 16:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

Hello,

Anybody knows why the "silent" agrument of the fs' ->fill_super() routines is
passed as ((flags & MS_VERBOSE) ? 1 : 0) ?.  It should be !(flags & MS_VERBOSE)
instead, yes?

I don't belive the bug is not known... 

Regards,
Alex.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: [RFC] MS_VERBOSE handling in get_sb_bdev()
  2004-10-14 16:06 [RFC] MS_VERBOSE handling in get_sb_bdev() Alex Zarochentsev
@ 2004-10-14 18:50 ` Randy.Dunlap
  2004-10-15  7:03   ` [PATCH] " Alex Zarochentsev
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Randy.Dunlap @ 2004-10-14 18:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Alex Zarochentsev; +Cc: linux-kernel

Alex Zarochentsev wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Anybody knows why the "silent" agrument of the fs' ->fill_super() routines is
> passed as ((flags & MS_VERBOSE) ? 1 : 0) ?.  It should be !(flags & MS_VERBOSE)
> instead, yes?
> 
> I don't belive the bug is not known... 

I saw several of those about 1 year ago when I updated Al's
fs option patches and got them merged.

They should be fixed IMO, but it's low priority, they work ("it ain't
broke so don't fix it"), and maybe someone else thinks that there is
no problem at all, i.e., they aren't broken at all...

-- 
~Randy

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* [PATCH] Re: [RFC] MS_VERBOSE handling in get_sb_bdev()
  2004-10-14 18:50 ` Randy.Dunlap
@ 2004-10-15  7:03   ` Alex Zarochentsev
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Alex Zarochentsev @ 2004-10-15  7:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Randy.Dunlap; +Cc: linux-kernel

On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 11:50:32AM -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> Alex Zarochentsev wrote:
> >Hello,
> >
> >Anybody knows why the "silent" agrument of the fs' ->fill_super() routines 
> >is
> >passed as ((flags & MS_VERBOSE) ? 1 : 0) ?.  It should be !(flags & 
> >MS_VERBOSE)
> >instead, yes?
> >
> >I don't belive the bug is not known... 
> 
> I saw several of those about 1 year ago when I updated Al's
> fs option patches and got them merged.
> 
> They should be fixed IMO, but it's low priority, they work ("it ain't
> broke so don't fix it"), and maybe someone else thinks that there is
> no problem at all, i.e., they aren't broken at all...

The kernel (2.6.9-rc4) patch is simple
==================================
--- linux/fs/super.c.orig	2004-10-14 18:12:50.213426568 +0400
+++ linux/fs/super.c	2004-10-14 18:13:46.923805280 +0400
@@ -692,7 +692,7 @@ struct super_block *get_sb_bdev(struct f
 		strlcpy(s->s_id, bdevname(bdev, b), sizeof(s->s_id));
 		s->s_old_blocksize = block_size(bdev);
 		sb_set_blocksize(s, s->s_old_blocksize);
-		error = fill_super(s, data, flags & MS_VERBOSE ? 1 : 0);
+		error = fill_super(s, data, !(flags & MS_VERBOSE));
 		if (error) {
 			up_write(&s->s_umount);
 			deactivate_super(s);
==================================

there is another bug in the mount utility, it seems to me.  mount never sets
MS_VERBOSE.  I think it should be set when the mount does not do "fs probing"
as in "mount -t auto ".

> -- 
> ~Randy

-- 
Alex.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2004-10-15  7:06 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-10-14 16:06 [RFC] MS_VERBOSE handling in get_sb_bdev() Alex Zarochentsev
2004-10-14 18:50 ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-10-15  7:03   ` [PATCH] " Alex Zarochentsev

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).