On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 10:27 +0000, Al Viro wrote: > Back to another question: which syscalls should and which syscalls should not > trigger automount on the last component? Note that it's something we'd better > be consistent about between autofs4 and cifs/afs/nfs... In addition to the ones that trigger automounts now: One syscall that we've had a lot of complaints about is 'stat()'. Since it doesn't follow symlinks, it will fail to trigger the automount, and will return bogus values for st_dev. This again confuses some versions of the 'du' utility that check the value of st_dev before and after entering the subdir. (see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=431166 ) In the cifs/afs/nfs case, statfs() should really trigger automounts too. Not sure if we want that for the autofs case. Finally, it makes little sense for cifs/afs/nfs to allow open() on the underlying directory, even if O_NOFOLLOW is set. Again, autofs might be an exception due to its reliance on ioctls as a method of communication with the kernel. Cheers Trond -- 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
