From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751495Ab3BEFgz (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2013 00:36:55 -0500 Received: from relay.parallels.com ([195.214.232.42]:36387 "EHLO relay.parallels.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751137Ab3BEFgy (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2013 00:36:54 -0500 Message-ID: <51109A64.8010904@parallels.com> Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 09:36:36 +0400 From: Stanislav Kinsbursky User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130106 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "J. Bruce Fields" , CC: , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] SUNRPC: rework cache upcall to avoid NFSd root References: <20130204105728.11633.53621.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20130204141719.GA815@fieldses.org> In-Reply-To: <20130204141719.GA815@fieldses.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.30.18.163] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 04.02.2013 18:17, J. Bruce Fields пишет: > On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 02:02:29PM +0300, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote: >> swapping >> >> The main idea of this patch set is to call cache request not on kthread >> upcall, but on userspace daemon cache_read call. This fixes the problem with >> gaining of wrong dentry path after calling d_path() in kthread root context >> (svc_export_request() callback), which always work in init root context, but >> containers can work in "root jail" - i.e. have it's own nested root. >> >> v2: >> 1) NFS DNS cache update wasn't done in the firest version. So this patch set >> does preparation cleanup of the NFS DNS cache routines. >> 2) Also, this patch set doesn't remove cache_upcall helper anymore, because >> it's still required for NFS DNS cache. > > Argh--I really prefer incremental patches once I've already committed > something, but OK. > Sorry. I was thinking about incremental patches. Next time I'll do so. > Backing out the old patches, I'll take a look at these. The first two > should probably get an ACK from Trond. > Trond, could you review first two patches, please? They are just clean-ups, actually. Nothing special. Required to unify the interfaces for latter patches in the series. -- Best regards, Stanislav Kinsbursky