On 2016/11/4 3:17, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 14:08:31 +0800 zhongjiang <zhongjiang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> From: zhong jiang <zhongjiang@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Since 'commit 3e89e1c5ea84 ("hugetlb: make mm and fs code explicitly non-modular")'
>> bring in the mainline. mount hugetlbfs will result in the following issue.
>>
>> mount: unknown filesystme type 'hugetlbfs'
>>
>> because previous patch remove the module_alias_fs, when we mount the fs type,
>> the caller get_fs_type can not find the filesystem.
>>
>> The patch just recover the module_alias_fs to identify the hugetlbfs.
> hm, 3e89e1c5ea84 ("hugetlb: make mm and fs code explicitly
> non-modular") was merged almost a year ago. And you are apparently the
> first person to discover this regression. Can you think why that is?
when I pull the upstream patch in 4.9-rc2. I find that I cannot mount the hugetlbfs.
but when I pull the upstream remain patch in the next day. I test again. it work well.
so I reply the mail right now, please ignore the patch. The detailed reason is not digged.
I am sorry for wasting your time.
Thanks you
zhongjiang
>> index 4fb7b10..b63e7de 100644
>> --- a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
>> +++ b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
>> @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@
>> #include <linux/security.h>
>> #include <linux/magic.h>
>> #include <linux/migrate.h>
>> +#include <linux/module.h>
>> #include <linux/uio.h>
>>
>> #include <asm/uaccess.h>
>> @@ -1209,6 +1210,7 @@ static struct dentry *hugetlbfs_mount(struct file_system_type *fs_type,
>> .mount = hugetlbfs_mount,
>> .kill_sb = kill_litter_super,
>> };
>> +MODULE_ALIAS_FS("hugetlbfs");
>>
>> static struct vfsmount *hugetlbfs_vfsmount[HUGE_MAX_HSTATE];
>>
>
> .
>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>