[RFC/PATCH 8/8] revoke: add to documentation V7

2007-12-14 Thread Pekka J Enberg
From: Pekka Enberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] Add the -revoke() file operation to VFS documentation. Cc: Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Al Viro [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Christoph Hellwig [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] Signed-off-by: Pekka Enberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

[RFC/PATCH 7/8] revoke: support for ext2 and ext3 V7

2007-12-14 Thread Pekka J Enberg
From: Pekka Enberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] Add revoke support to ext2, ext3 and ext4 by wiring f_ops-revoke with generic_file_revoke. Cc: Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Al Viro [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Christoph Hellwig [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] Signed-off-by: Pekka Enberg

[RFC/PATCH 6/8] revoke: wire up i386 system call V7

2007-12-14 Thread Pekka J Enberg
From: Pekka Enberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] Make revokeat system call available to user-space on i386. [EMAIL PROTECTED]: fix 32-bit userspace] Cc: Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Al Viro [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Christoph Hellwig [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] Signed-off-by: Pekka

[RFC/PATCH 5/8] revoke: add to makefile V7

2007-12-14 Thread Pekka J Enberg
From: Pekka Enberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] Add fs/revoke.c and fs/revoked_inode.c to build when CONFIG_MMU is enabled. Cc: Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Al Viro [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Christoph Hellwig [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] Signed-off-by: Pekka Enberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[RFC/PATCH 4/8] revoke: core code V7

2007-12-14 Thread Pekka J Enberg
From: Pekka Enberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] The revokeat(2) system call ensures that after successful revocation you can only access an inode via a file descriptor that is obtained from a subsequent open(2) call. The open(2) system call can be blocked by the caller with chmod(2) and chown(2) prior to

[PATCH 1/2] Unionfs: avoid using drop_pagecache_sb in remount

2007-12-14 Thread Erez Zadok
Exporting drop_pagecache_sb to modules is somewhat risky because one cannot sleep inside invalidate_mapping_pages. This could cause a lot of latency in the pre-emption code. So don't export this symbol to minimize the risk that others will use it. Instead, unionfs will try to directly

[RFC/PATCH 3/8] revoke: file, inode, and address space operations V7

2007-12-14 Thread Pekka J Enberg
From: Pekka Enberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] Add file, inode, and addresspace operations for inodes that represent revoked files. Cc: Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Al Viro [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Christoph Hellwig [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] Signed-off-by: Pekka Enberg [EMAIL

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Unionfs: clarify usage.txt mount options

2007-12-14 Thread Michael Tokarev
Erez Zadok wrote: --- a/Documentation/filesystems/unionfs/usage.txt +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/unionfs/usage.txt [] +OPTIONS can be any legal combination one of: ^ A small typo. + +- ro # mount file system read-only +- rw #

[RFC/PATCH 1/8] revoke: special mmap handling V7

2007-12-14 Thread Pekka J Enberg
From: Pekka Enberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] This adds special handling for revoked shared memory mappings. We want to raise SIGBUS if someone accesses a revoked mapping and return ENODEV if somebody tries to remap one with mmap(2). Cc: Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Al Viro [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc:

[RFC/PATCH 2/8] revoke: inode revoke lock V7

2007-12-14 Thread Pekka J Enberg
From: Pekka Enberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] The revoke operation cannibalizes the revoked struct inode and removes it from the inode cache thus forcing subsequent callers to look up the real inode. Therefore we must make sure that while the revoke operation is in progress (e.g. flushing dirty pages to

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Unionfs: clarify usage.txt mount options

2007-12-14 Thread Michael Tokarev
Michael Tokarev wrote: Erez Zadok wrote: [...] JFYI: My message bounced back: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: host cs.sunysb.edu[130.245.1.15] said: 550 5.7.1 Access denied (in reply to MAIL FROM command) (stupid anti-spam policy @sunysb.edu, it seems - refusing to accept *.ru as sender address, no

[GIT PULL -mm] 0/2 Unionfs updates/fixes/cleanups

2007-12-14 Thread Erez Zadok
The following is a series of patches related to Unionfs. These patches were tested (where appropriate) on Linus's 2.6.24 latest code (as of v2.6.24-rc5-43-gda8cadb), MM (MMOTM stamp-2007-12-13-15-37), as well as the backports to 2.6.{23,22,21,20,19,18,9} on ext2/3/4, xfs, reiserfs, nfs2/3/4,

[PATCH 2/2] Unionfs: clarify usage.txt mount options

2007-12-14 Thread Erez Zadok
CC: Jim Kissel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Signed-off-by: Erez Zadok [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Documentation/filesystems/unionfs/usage.txt | 38 +++ 1 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/unionfs/usage.txt

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Unionfs: clarify usage.txt mount options

2007-12-14 Thread Erez Zadok
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Michael Tokarev writes: Erez Zadok wrote: --- a/Documentation/filesystems/unionfs/usage.txt +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/unionfs/usage.txt [] +OPTIONS can be any legal combination one of: ^ A small typo.

Re: [PATCH] dio: falling through to buffered I/O when invalidation of a page fails

2007-12-14 Thread Badari Pulavarty
On Tue, 2007-12-11 at 17:00 -0800, Zach Brown wrote: Hisashi Hifumi wrote: Hi. Current dio has some problems: 1, In ext3 ordered, dio write can return with EIO because of the race between invalidation of a page and jbd. jbd pins the bhs while committing journal so

Re: [PATCH] dio: falling through to buffered I/O when invalidation of a page fails

2007-12-14 Thread Zach Brown
If anyone has a testcase - I can take a look at the problem again. I can try and throw something together.. - z - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-fsdevel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at

Re: [UNIONFS] 00/42 Unionfs and related patches review

2007-12-14 Thread hooanon05
Hello Professor Zadok, Erez Zadok: I believe that small VFS changes to help stackable file systems are perfectly reasonable, and a good thing; and I'm working on such patches. Conversely, I am very mindful of the VFS's complexity, so I also believe that massive VFS changes are a bad thing; I