Hello,
I figured out that the problems with encfs were caused by the 2.6.33.5-rt23
patch. "rm -r" within a encrypted container crashed the whole system.
With 2.6.33.5-rt25 encfs works, and aufs seems to work too.
The a.patch didn't work at first.
Not knowing what I'm doing, with a little bit try and error, I figured out,
that the 2.6.33.5-rt25 compiles if I reduce the a.patch to this:
diff --git a/fs/aufs/mtx.h b/fs/aufs/mtx.h
index 1b7e6f0..866d1ee 100644
--- a/fs/aufs/mtx.h
+++ b/fs/aufs/mtx.h
@@ -33,13 +33,13 @@ struct thread_info;
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES
static inline void mutex_set_owner(struct mutex *lock)
{
- lock->owner = current_thread_info();
+ lock->lock.owner = current;
}
#else
static inline void mutex_set_owner(struct mutex *lock)
{
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
- lock->owner = current_thread_info();
+ lock->lock.owner = current;
#endif
}
#endif
It seems as it works, but the tests the next days will show...
Can you tell me something about the risks and side effects by leaving out the
rest of the patch?
>> By the Way, there are already new releases of the rt patch.
>Hmm, essentially I am not an RT patch user. I just have been developing
>RT patches for aufs just to respond the requests from RT users. This
>policy will not change, ie. I will do develop the RT patch, but I won't
>do it myself as soon as the new RT patch is released.
>You might remember that I have asked you "do you really need it?"
This was really meant as information only, NOT as something like "come on, make
a new patch" or so.
Best wishes ML1982
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Dienstag, 20. Juli 2010 09:14
To: Lipkowski, Merten
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: aufs does not compile with 2.6.33.5-rt23, error in
fs/aufs/super.c:450
Hi,
"Lipkowski, Merten":
> Sorry for my late answer.
> It seems that the patch runs.
> Great job.
Glad to hear that, but sad to heat that you could not test it well due
to another problem.
> By the Way, there are already new releases of the rt patch.
Hmm, essentially I am not an RT patch user. I just have been developing
RT patches for aufs just to respond the requests from RT users. This
policy will not change, ie. I will do develop the RT patch, but I won't
do it myself as soon as the new RT patch is released.
You might remember that I have asked you "do you really need it?"
> I hope there would be a day, when aufs and rt are included within the
> mainline kernel...
Unfortunately LKML people chose UnionMount instead of aufs.
J. R. Okajima
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint
What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone?
Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first
