A: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post Q: Were do I find info about this thing called top-posting? A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? A: No. Q: Should I include quotations after my reply? http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top On Sun, May 09, 2021 at 10:16:06AM +0000, Shyam Prasad wrote: > Hi Salvatore, > > Thanks for reminding me. I had to do some reading to reply to this one. > The situation right now is this: > The patch "cifs: Set CIFS_MOUNT_USE_PREFIX_PATH flag on setting cifs_sb->prepath." has been reverted. Which means that the DFS bug which you originally faced will not be seen. > > Hi Greg, > > Here are the two patches which I'm referring to: > 1. cifs: Set CIFS_MOUNT_USE_PREFIX_PATH flag on setting cifs_sb->prepath. > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?h=v5.12&id=a738c93fb1c17e386a09304b517b1c6b2a6a5a8b > This fixed an issue when two cifs mount points shared a common prefix in the path which they mounted from the same server. The patch was marked for CC:stable considering that this fix can be important for some users. > However, there was a dependent change for DFS scenario, which is present in the Linus' mainline tree, but were not marked for CC:stable, so missing from the stable trees. > Due to the missing dependent changes, DFS users faced issues with pre-5.11 kernels, and this patch was reverted in the stable trees. So, you need that a738c93fb1c1 ("cifs: Set CIFS_MOUNT_USE_PREFIX_PATH flag on setting cifs_sb->prepath.") merged to where exactly? > 2. Due to a major change that went into the 5.11 kernel (the new mount API support), the code differs significantly, and the missing patch cannot be applied to pre-5.11 trees. > Hence, Paulo submitted the attached patch (cifs: fix prefix path in dfs mounts), which fixes this for pre-5.11 kernels. Can you submit this in a proper format (i.e. not dos line ends, and good changelog and most importantly, YOUR signed off by on it saying that the patch came through you? Make this a 2 patch series please, and be specific as to what tree(s) this needs to be backported to, and I will be glad to review it. thnaks, greg k-h
