On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 11:55:01AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > It seems very likely that this was just a subtlety that I missed. > I doesn't help that "ino" isn't actually and inode and isn't freed like > an inode, but that is no excuse. > > When we add the rcu_head linkage to 'struct autofs_info', we might as > well remove the 'struct inode' from there - it doesn't seem to have been > used for years. Umm... I can do that, but then we get greater potential for conflicts and the whole thing might be better off in autofs tree. Ian, up to you - I can throw both into a never-rebased branch, so you could merge it into your tree; the first one is -stable fodder, though...
