From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763316AbXHaFRf (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:17:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758202AbXHaFR2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:17:28 -0400 Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:40337 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756289AbXHaFR1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:17:27 -0400 Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 22:16:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Trond Myklebust cc: Frank van Maarseveen , Hua Zhong , "'Linux Kernel Mailing List'" , akpm@linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression In-Reply-To: <1188536658.6626.98.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> Message-ID: References: <000701c7eb49$cff701c0$6fe50540$@com> <1188513433.6626.24.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> <1188535485.6626.85.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> <1188536658.6626.98.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > So you are saying that it is acceptable for the kernel to decide > unilaterally to override mount options? IT'S WHAT WE'VE APPARENTLY ALWAYS DONE! > Why aren't we doing that for any other filesystem than NFS? How hard is it to acknowledge the following little word: "regression" It's simple. You broke things. You may want to fix them, but you need to fix them in a way that does not break user space. Linus