Messages in this thread | | | From | "Eric W. Biederman" <> | Date | Tue, 25 Sep 2012 00:05:12 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Revert "__d_unalias() should refuse to move mountpoints" |
| |
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@canonical.com> wrote:
>Hey, > >Op 25-09-12 05:39, Eric W. Biederman schreef: >> Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@canonical.com> writes: >> >>> This reverts commit ee3efa91e240f513898050ef305a49a653c8ed90. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@canonical.com> >>> >>> My thread about the regression seemed to have been ignored, so I can >only >>> conclude nobody objects against a full revert of this patch. >>> >>> My testcase is simply booting through netboot with / and ~/nfs as >separate >>> nfs filesystems, then doing 'ls ~/nfs' followed by 'ls ~' in a >gnome-terminal >>> window, then I get: >> Do I read your description correctly: Without using a bind mount you >> have the same nfs filesystem mounted on / and on ~/nfs? >> >> Something is definitely off with your configuration but if to work >you >> need to move mount points around then that something seems much >deeper >> than the __d_unalias change. >> >> What filesystems do you have mounted where? >> >/ is a nfs filesystem, ~/nfs is a different nfs filesystem.
Are both filesystems on the same server?
Are the two filesystems distinct filesystem on the server?
Unless there is duplication of something somewhere the d_unalias code should not trigger.
> Just doing >ls / is enough >to make all filesystems mounted on / return -EBUSY and disappear. > >I also have a subdir of ~/nfs/ bind mounted to /lib/modules/$(uname >-r)/kernel >for easy debugging so just doing 'make' in the kernel tree is enough to >get the >new modules + bzImage, but I don't know if it is a factor in >reproducing this bug >or not.
Unlikely. But interesting. It at least fits the criteria of showing up to different places. It should not be enough for d_materialise uniqe.
Eric
| |