Re: 2.6.6-rc1-mm1

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 09:52:01PM +0800, raven@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 08:39:59PM +0800, raven@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > While I understand the motive for not exporting the lock the question of 
> > > how one should obtain vfsmount structs when needed remains?
> > 
> > You shouldn't.
> > 
> 
> Shouldn't need them?

Exactly.

> But your point is that they shouldn't need to be used and an different 
> design is should be used, right.
> 
> Could make life hard for the automounter.
> Possibly somewhat harder to solve the remaining limitations of autofs.
> But I haven't got a clear enough picture of what's needed yet (still).
> 
> I guess your point is that these services should reside in the VFS proper?

If you ask me much of what autofs does should reside in the VFS, namely
triggering userspace upcalls as soon someone enters a special trigger
(aka delayed mountpount) directory and expiry of vfsmounts.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/