Quoting Christoph Hellwig (hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx): > On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 11:52:52AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > These patches fix several issues raised at previous submissions: > > > > - passing NULL vfsmounts > > - using nameidata > > - using extra stack for vfsmount argument > > > > So, it seems to me that there's in fact no issues remaining and the > > best excuse you can come up with is that it's a dumb idea. Well, > > that's not a very imressive technical argument IMNSHO. > > Well, pathname based access control is a dumb idea, and we've been > through this N times. You've also been told that vfs_ routines should > remain without vfsmount, and no that's not a stack-related issue no idea > where that part came from. Sorry, noone else asked, so just out of curiosity - the *actual* reason is api layering? Or am I missing another reason? thanks, -serge -- 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
