Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Subject | Re: [patch 3/6] vfs: mountinfo stable peer group id | From | Ram Pai <> | Date | Mon, 24 Mar 2008 01:50:14 -0700 |
| |
On Thu, 2008-03-20 at 21:43 +0000, Al Viro wrote: > On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 07:37:51PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > > Argh... OK, I'll try to put something together tonight, after I get some > > > sleep - 31 hours of uptime _suck_ ;-/ > > > > Gosh, yes. > .....snip... > Is there any reason why we do that in ->umount_begin() and not *after* > it, unconditionally, straight from do_umount()? AFAICS, the only reason > why it's done from fs-specific code is figuring out which mount-list > should the stuff go back to, and that's both broken *and* not needed > with sanitized locking as above. While we are at it, I'd rather return > ->umount_begin() to its previous prototype, TYVM - the less filesystem > sees vfsmounts, the better off we all are...
I think that ->umount_begin also acts a hook for providing pre-umount event notification to userspace from filesystems; something that is required by DMAPI interface.
RP
> > Comments? If nobody objects, I'm going to do that in vfs-fixes branch > and then push to Linus...
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |