Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 3 Apr 2014 11:11:20 -0700 | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] cgroup changes for v3.15-rc1 | From | Linus Torvalds <> |
| |
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote: > > C3. fed95bab8d29 ("sysfs: fix namespace refcnt leak") added an > argument to kernfs_mount() and was routed through driver-core-next > after cgroup pulled the tree. cgroup's usage needs to be updated > accordingly.
This one I find very annoying. There's exactly *one* user of that interface (back in fed95bab8d29 there were none), and it doesn't want that dummy argument.
WTF? Why did the driver-core-next development add that argument at all, rather than just pass in NULL directly? Do we expect to grow more users of kernfs_mount?
And the "bool *new_sb_created" argument really makes *zero* sense to kernfs_mount(). It was added to fix a namespace refcount leak, BUT kernfs_mount() DOES NOT TAKE A NAMESPACE PARAMETER!
So quite frankly, that kernfs_mount() calling convention change looks completely f*cked up.
I think I'm going to resolve that conflict differently from your suggested one - I'm going to just remove the broken stupid "new_sb_created" argument from the kernfs_mount() helper function.
(It obviously stays around for kernfs_mount_ns() that *does* take a namespace pointer).
People, holler if you disagree, I'll hold off pushing out my resolution for a while anyway (do all the normal build tests and reboot into it).
Linus
| |