On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 12:38:17PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 12:16 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > 5.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
> >
> > ------------------
> >
> > From: Max Reitz <mreitz@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > [ Upstream commit 24754db2728a87c513cc480c70c09072a7a40ba6 ]
> >
> > Every fuse_req belongs to a fuse_conn. Right now, we always know which
> > fuse_conn that is based on the respective device, but we want to allow
> > multiple (sub)mounts per single connection, and then the corresponding
> > filesystem is not going to be so trivial to obtain.
> >
> > Storing a pointer to the associated fuse_conn in every fuse_req will
> > allow us to trivially find any request's superblock (and thus
> > filesystem) even then.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Stable-dep-of: b1fe686a765e ("fuse: don't unhash root")
>
> Why are this and the following patch marked as dependencies of
> b1fe686a765e ("fuse: don't unhash root")?
>
> I think they are completely independent. While backporting them is
> probably harmless, it should not be needed.
Good point, they were not needed, now dropped both of them, thanks for
the review!
greg k-h
