> > > > However David and Christoph are beavering away on the r-o-bind-mounts > > > > patches and I expect that there will be overlaps with unprivileged mounts. > > > > > > > > Could we coordinate things a bit please? Decide who goes first, review > > > > and maybe even test each others work, etc? > > > > > > Al is setting up a git tree for VFS work. per-mount r/o will go in > > > as one of the first things, aswell as his rework of the path lookup > > > logic to fix the intents mess. > > > > > > > That didn't answer my question.. > > Well, Al as the defacto VFS maintainer will decide on the ordering. I think we agreed, that r-o-bind mounts are more important, so they should go first. They have also received more attention. OTOH there isn't really any fundamental conflict between the two patchsets, so going in together (if the ro-bind patches miss 2.6.25) should also be possible. > Reviewing this stuff properly is still on my todo list, but currently > I'm busy with more important things. So what should I do? Would Al be wanting to merge this into his VFS tree? (Can't find it on git.kernel.org yet, BTW.) I can set up a git tree for these patches if that makes things easier. Or should I just wait and resubmit after every kernel release, hoping that it becomes _the_ most important thing on Christoph's list ;) Miklos - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
