On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 10:17:14AM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > * [unsolved, to be dealt along with per-superblock write counts] > do_remount() plays fast and loose with MNT_READONLY for !MS_BIND case. > * [*really* unsolved] it remains to be seen whether we want to > propagate modifications of mount flags via shared subtree stuff. For most > of those it's trivial (and arguably the right thing to do), but ro/rw is > really nasty. Nick's mnt_want_write() implementation will need very careful > analysis. Speaking of autofs4, what the hell is going on in autofs_dev_ioctl_ismountpoint()? Checks in there make no sense, both the "could that dentry be negative?" and whatever the hell it is trying to do with mnt_mountpoint. Ian? -- 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
