From: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
hpa@zytor.com, Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>,
Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] autofs: fix the wrong usage of the deprecated task_pgrp_nr()
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 10:35:19 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1232415319.3136.18.camel@zeus.themaw.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090119191729.GB24852@redhat.com>
On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 20:17 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 01/19, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> >
> > Quoting Oleg Nesterov (oleg@redhat.com):
> > > On 01/19, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > >
> > > > But so there does still need to be a patch modifying parse_options()
> > > > to return an error if pgrp= was not specified, right?
> > >
> > > Why? In that case we should use the caller's pgrp. This is what the
> > > current tries to do, why should the patch change this behaviour?
> >
> > Well, because Ian said that not specifying it is supposed to
> > be an error :) I didn't quite understand why, so am fishing
> > for more info...
>
> I think you misunderstood him. Or I am totally confused ;)
>
> In any case. Both autofs and autofs4 use current's pgrp if this
> option was not specified, and these patches doesn't change this
> behaviour.
>
>
> Actually, I am very much surprized this one-liner patch has so
> many questions. Isn't it "obiously correct" ?
Maybe it is.
Sorry Serge, this was actually the first of two patches from Oleg and I
only copied you on the first (since that is where I started the
discussion), oops!
The reason this has become so difficult is largely my fault and it is
entirely due to my lack of understanding of how automount will play
within pid namespaces.
But your last reply to me was very helpful in this regard, thanks for
your patience. So this painful discussion has been useful, at least to
me.
I see you've already backed out part of your original change, which may
have been a little premature, as I can likely go back and review the
original patches now.
Ian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-20 1:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-18 7:34 Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 2:20 ` Ian Kent
2009-01-19 6:35 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-01-19 7:45 ` Ian Kent
2009-01-19 17:09 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-01-20 1:18 ` Ian Kent
2009-01-19 7:08 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 8:11 ` Ian Kent
2009-01-19 8:32 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 11:15 ` Ian Kent
2009-01-19 12:42 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 13:33 ` Ian Kent
2009-01-19 14:30 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 17:48 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-01-19 18:05 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 18:24 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-01-19 19:17 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 19:20 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-01-19 19:32 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 19:35 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-01-19 20:04 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 20:48 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-01-19 21:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-19 22:11 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-01-20 2:07 ` Ian Kent
2009-01-20 1:35 ` Ian Kent [this message]
2009-01-20 1:38 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-01-20 7:08 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-23 4:48 ` Ian Kent
2009-01-23 8:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-23 9:09 ` Ian Kent
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1232415319.3136.18.camel@zeus.themaw.net \
--to=raven@themaw.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=serue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=xemul@openvz.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome