On Sun, Mar 2, 2025 at 6:25 AM Pali Rohár <pali@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sunday 23 February 2025 18:48:50 Steve French wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 23, 2025 at 4:23 PM Pali Rohár <pali@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Hello Steve, I see that you have merged first two changes (1/4 and 2/4) > > > from this patch series, but the remaining (3/4 and 4/4). Is there any > > > reason why 3/4 and 4/4 was not taken? > > > > Mainly because I wasn't able to easily test it, and didn't get test > > feedback for anyone else > > on those two who had tried it. > > > > I am ok with looking at them again - and thx for rebasing. > > Ok, when you have a time, please look at them. > > > There are some of the 41 patches in your updated cifs branch that do look suitable or rc5 > > There is "cifs: Change translation of STATUS_DELETE_PENDING to -EBUSY" > which stops returning -ENOENT for directory entry which still exists. IIRC - there were some objections to this if it could break any plausible existing application behavior, but will need to dig into the thread from earlier. Tom or Paulo, Do you remember if this is one that you had mentioned? -- Thanks, Steve
