On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 09:25 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 18:04 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Myklebust, Trond > >> <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > > >> > Your assumption is that in the majority of cases, we do _not_ want to > >> > automount the final directory unless we know that we are expecting a > >> > directory. > >> > >> Umm. That is the assumption yes, BUT THAT IS ALSO THE CURRENT STATE. > >> > >> So it's more than an assumption. It's a fact. > >> > >> So when you call it "assumption", you are basically ignoring and > >> trying to belittle current reality. Why? > > > > AFAICR, the whole point of doing the ->automount() stuff was to fix what > > was perceived to be a broken situation in which the application was more > > often than not seeing the properties of a directory which it would > > _never_ directly access. > > We are pitting one set of applications against another. There's no > Right(TM) behavior here. In any case there will be applications which > will behave strangely, be extremely slow, etc... > > Changing the behavior of stat will cause regressions. Period. If we > just fixed up those apps which behave badly with the old kernels, there > wouldn't be any regressions. That's the point isn't it. Your patch changes the pre-exiting behavior of NFS and probably CIFS and AFS, but restores the pre-existing behavior of autofs, which is something I've wanted to change for years. My suggestion of using LOOKUP_DIRECTORY at path walk sites that need it is still a possibility. I'm still looking through path walk call sites. But that resolution will still leave NFS et.al. with LOOKUP_FOLLOW only calls having changed semantic behavior. There is no resolution to this that will satisfy everyone. Passing on the lookup flags is, I think, the only way to segregate the sub system behaviors and I'm not in favor of that either. Ian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
