On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 11:01:57 -0400 Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Good point. I wasn't thinking about that case. > > I think having cifs_sb->mountdata as an unconditional member would be a > better option. We don't generally have *that* many superblocks and it > would be nice to get rid of some #ifdef's. In most cases these strings > are quite small so if someone compiles DFS support out, it won't be > wasting that much memory. > Another argument for this solution... The CIFS code currently handles remounts poorly. If we make it a point to keep the original mount options around it may make it easier to eventually fix that. -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
