From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759899AbZEKV1c (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 May 2009 17:27:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758376AbZEKV1X (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 May 2009 17:27:23 -0400 Received: from mail-bw0-f174.google.com ([209.85.218.174]:39604 "EHLO mail-bw0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753953AbZEKV1W (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 May 2009 17:27:22 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090511221947.50eda8d5@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> References: <20090509143742.GA27663@kroah.com> <1242063630.6624.22.camel@moss-terrapins.epoch.ncsc.mil> <20090511175626.GA4758@kroah.com> <1242074517.6624.183.camel@moss-terrapins.epoch.ncsc.mil> <20090511221947.50eda8d5@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> From: Kay Sievers Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 23:27:01 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [patch 00/13] devtmpfs patches To: Alan Cox Cc: "David P. Quigley" , Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Greg KH , Jan Blunck Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 23:19, Alan Cox wrote: >> By doing its own fstype, we could also make the auto-mount optional, >> because you could always reach the filesystem anytime later. > > Killing the automount would also fix a lot of the other problems as you > can then mount it in the initrd and dump it when you have the real fs up, > or you can mount it privately thanks to Al Viro's magic with mount points > and only the daemon that must make the "real" device file system need > have it mounted and accessible. Sounds good. >> A different fstype has the slight inconvenience, that existing >> userspace needs to be taught to handle it explicitly, while a tmfps is >> already handled automatically because we use tmpfs already today. But >> that may not be too important. > > Thats a good thing - it stops some of the suprise behaviour the Eric > pointed out and objected to. I'll give it try. Any name suggestions to throw at that thing? :) >> Thanks a lot for your tests and analysis, > > And I think btw the underlying failure was in the tty layer - I just need > to find it. It's the second report vaguely of this form so something is > lurking in the stygian depths. Ah, good. So that was a useful outcome of it at least. :) Thanks, Kay