[PATCH] uverbs: kill last remaining modular get_empty_filp user

required for file_operations instances in the same module as the underlying filesystem. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Index: linux-2.6/drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_main.c === --- linux-2.6.orig/d

Re: Block devices

On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 02:05:52AM -0500, David H. Lynch Jr. wrote: > Can I boot an initramfs kernel without a block device ? Yes. > Can I write a filesystem driver for a flash device that does not > require a block device ? Yes. > Are their any examples of something even close ? F

Re: NFS/LSM: allow NFS to control all of its own mount options

Please don't introduce a special case for just nfs. All filesystems should control their mount options, so please provide some library helpers for context= handling and move it into all filesystems that can support selinux. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel"

Re: [2.6 patch] remove generic_commit_write()

On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 10:16:37AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > This patch removes the obsolete and no longer used generic_commit_write(). Given that the APIs these are helpers for are gone this function should go away. ACK. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdeve

Re: [2.6 patch] make vfs_ioctl() static

On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 10:18:42AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > This patch makes the needlessly global vfs_ioctl() static. I think the point was toa eventually export it for stackable filesystem use. But until they start using it marking it static seems fine with me. - To unsubscribe from this li

Re: Re[2]: [linux-cifs-client] review 5, was Re: projected date for mount.cifs to support DFS junction points

On Sat, Feb 16, 2008 at 11:51:52AM +0300, Q wrote: > At first glance cifs_get_inode_info_remote won't work cause it's old dfs > code not new one. But I caught what Christoph meant now, and will try to > rewrite it this way. Yes, this was supposed to be a refactoring of the existing code. By doing

Re: [RFC] ext3 freeze feature

On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 08:51:15PM +0900, Takashi Sato wrote: > So XFS_IOC_FREEZE and XFS_IOC_THAW cannot be lifted to generic code simply. > I think we should create new generic numbers for freeze and thaw Actually we've lifted specific ioctls to the generic layer before all the time in drivers.

Re: [linux-cifs-client] review 5, was Re: projected date for mount.cifs to support DFS junction points

If you like these kind of consolidation patches here's another one: Index: linux-2.6/fs/cifs/inode.c === --- linux-2.6.orig/fs/cifs/inode.c 2008-02-15 22:46:08.0 +0100 +++ linux-2.6/fs/cifs/inode.c 2008-02-15 23:09:28.

Re: [linux-cifs-client] review 5, was Re: projected date for mount.cifs to support DFS junction points

On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 07:37:35PM +0300, Q (Igor Mammedov) wrote: > Sorry guys, but I have a lot of work for the last 3 weeks, > so I couldn't spare much time for a hobby and react quickly. No problem. I know this problem very well as almost all of my core kernel contributions are spare time as

Re: [patch 00/10] mount ownership and unprivileged mount syscall (v8)

On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 01:09:51AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > However David and Christoph are beavering away on the r-o-bind-mounts > > > patches and I expect that there will be overlaps with unprivileged mounts. > > > > > > Could we coordinate things a bit please? Decide who goes first, r

Re: [patch 00/10] mount ownership and unprivileged mount syscall (v8)

On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 10:21:03PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > Linus has just merged all the VFS renaming patches, so the decks > are clear for looking at this work. > > However David and Christoph are beavering away on the r-o-bind-mounts > patches and I expect that there will be overlaps with

Re: i_version changes

On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 03:06:25PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > First there's a complete lack of documentation on this, which is very > > bad. Please document what the new semantics for i_version on regular > > files are supposed to be, and how it differes from the existing > > semantics for

Re: remove some of cifs hard to read ifdefs

On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 03:25:49PM -0600, Steve French wrote: > On Feb 7, 2008 12:25 PM, Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > and while I'm at it a lot of the non-DFS additions to cifs aren't quite > > up to standards for kernel code either, lots of u

Re: BTRFS partition usage...

On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 03:35:57PM -0800, David Miller wrote: > What XFS does is really unfortunate, let's learn from it's > mistake. I'd rather say what Sun did with their disklabels was rather unfortunate :) But yeah, new filesystem should cater for it's braindamage because it doesn't have any k

Re: [PATCH] ext4: move headers out of include/linux

On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 07:54:32AM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: > No, none of this is shared with e2fsprogs; e2fsprogs stopped using the > kernel header files about seven years ago. (May 2001, e2fsprogs 1.20). Yeah, I know userspace stopped using the direct copy. But for example XFS has exact copie

i_version changes

I think the i_version changes that hit mainline about a week ago are not as nice as they should be. First there's a complete lack of documentation on this, which is very bad. Please document what the new semantics for i_version on regular files are supposed to be, and how it differes from the exi

Re: [PATCH] ext4: move headers out of include/linux

On Sat, Feb 09, 2008 at 10:39:33AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Move ext4 headers out of include/linux. This is just the trivial move, > there's some more thing that could be done later. > > Ted, is anything of these shared with e2fsprogs or can we rip out all > that #i

[PATCH] efs: move headers out of include/linux/

oot should have a copy of it's own, but I'll leave that to a separate patch to avoid any contention. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Index: linux-2.6/fs/efs/dir.c === --- linux-2.6.orig/fs/

[PATCH 3/3] udf: move headers out include/linux/

only thing remaining in include/linux/ is a stub of udf_fs_i.h defining the four user-visible udf ioctls. It's also moved from unifdef-y to headers-y because it can be included unconditionally now. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Index: lin

[PATCH 1/3] udf: kill udf_set_blocksize

This helper has been quite useless since sb_min_blocksize was introduced and is misnamed while we're at it. Just opencode the few lines in the caller instead. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Index: linux-2.6/fs/

[PATCH 2/3] udf: kill useless file header comments for vfs method implementations

There's not need to document vfs method invocation rules, we have Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt and Documentation/filesystems/Locking for that. Also a lot of these comments where either plain wrong or horrible out of date. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I

Re: [RFC] ext3 freeze feature

On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 08:26:57AM -0500, Andreas Dilger wrote: > You may as well make the common ioctl the same as the XFS version, > both by number and parameters, so that applications which already > understand the XFS ioctl will work on other filesystems. Yes. In facy you should be able to li

Re: projected date for mount.cifs to support DFS junction points

On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 07:43:01AM -0600, Steve French wrote: > I only remember missing a loop unwinding on exit style comment of > yours that was not addressed in what got integrated. I will go back > through your notes again to see if I missed one. - there's still all that CONFIG_CIFS_DFS_UPCA

Re: [NFS] [PATCH] Make UDF exportable

On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 09:58:02PM +0100, Rasmus Rohde wrote: > > > + dotdot.d_name.name = ".."; > > > + dotdot.d_name.len = 2; > > > + > > > + lock_kernel(); > > > + if (!udf_find_entry(child->d_inode, &dotdot, &fibh, &cfi)) > > > + goto out_unlock; > > Have you ever tried this? I think

Re: [PATCH][RFC] fix reservation discarding in affs

On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 04:53:53AM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 10 Jan 2008, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Is there any chance you could either send me a affs image to run fsx > > on it or do it yourself? > > If you want you can use http://w

Re: [PATCH] reiserfs: use open_bdev_excl

On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 09:16:27PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 05:45:13 +0100 Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 26, 2007 at 04:31:01PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Use the proper helper to open a blockde

Re: [PATCH] reiserfs: use open_bdev_excl

On Wed, Dec 26, 2007 at 04:31:01PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Use the proper helper to open a blockdevice by name for filesystem > use, this makes sure it's properly claimed (also added for open-by-number) > and gets rid of the struct file abuse. > > Tested by

Re: [NFS] [PATCH] Make UDF exportable

On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 09:58:02PM +0100, Rasmus Rohde wrote: > Probably not. I just tested that I could read files and navigate the > directory structure. However looking into UDF I think you are right - it > will fail. > I have extended udf_find_entry() to do an explicit check based on > fileChar

Re: projected date for mount.cifs to support DFS junction points

On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 09:07:49AM +, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > If you want to get it into 2.6.25 get it out for review on -fsdevel > ASAP. 2.6.24 is almost done and it needs to be in acceptable state > before 2.6.25 opens. So I've done an extensive review now, but the patches

Re: [NFS] [PATCH] Make UDF exportable

On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 09:53:24PM +0100, Rasmus Rohde wrote: > I've cooked together a patch for making UDF exportable. Thanks, I know some people have been waiting for this for quite a while. Please make sure Jan Kara who's the new udf maintainer and linux-fsdevel where we discuss general filesys

Re: [patch 0/3] add perform_write to a_ops

On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 09:52:06PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > Moving up to higher layers might not be possible, due to lock/unlock > of i_mutex being inside generic_file_aio_write(). Well some bits can be moved up. Here's my grand plan which I plan to implement once I get some time for it (or

Re: [patch 0/3] add perform_write to a_ops

On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 06:04:10PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > a_ops->perform_write() was left out from Nick Piggin's new a_ops > patchset, as it was non-essential, and postponed for later inclusion. > > This short series reintroduces it, but only adds the fuse > implementation and not simple_p

Re: [RFC] ext3 freeze feature

On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 09:42:30PM +0900, Takashi Sato wrote: > Hi, > > >I am also wondering whether we should have system call(s) for these: > > > >On Jan 25, 2008 12:59 PM, Takashi Sato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>+ case EXT3_IOC_FREEZE: { > > > >>+ case EXT3_IOC_THAW: { > > > >An

Re: [Patch] document ext3 requirements (was Re: [RFD] Incremental fsck)

On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 08:43:25AM +1100, David Chinner wrote: > ext3 is not the only filesystem that will have trouble due to > volatile write caches. We see problems often enough with XFS > due to volatile write caches that it's in our FAQ: In fact it will hit every filesystem. A write-back cac

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

On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 04:14:54PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Humm, we were trying to get rid of file_list_lock(), this puts up > another user of the sb file list. > > Also, that loop looks horribly expensive: n*(1+m); where n is the list > size, and m the number of matching fds. > > Granted,

Re: [linux-cifs-client] review 4, was Re: projected date for mount.cifs to support DFS junction points

On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 04:15:05PM +0300, Q (Igor Mammedov) wrote: > > + dput(nd->dentry); > > + nd->dentry = dget(dentry); > > + if (d_mountpoint(nd->dentry)) > > + goto out_follow; > > > > A link should never be a mountpoint. > > why link? after patch 5 are applied DFS junction

review 5, was Re: projected date for mount.cifs to support DFS junction points

+#ifdef CONFIG_CIFS_DFS_UPCALL + if (is_remote) { + inode->i_op = + &cifs_dfs_referral_inode_operations; + inode->i_fop = NULL; i_fop should never be set to NULL. Just leave it

review 4, was Re: projected date for mount.cifs to support DFS junction points

[David, any chance you could look at the suggestion below to refactor the automount from ->follow_link code into a common helper now that we've grown a second copy from it] + if (cifs_sb->tcon->Flags & 0x2) { Please don't use magic numbers but symbolic defines. +static void* static vo

review 3, was Re: projected date for mount.cifs to support DFS junction points

+#ifdef CONFIG_CIFS_DFS_UPCALL + /* copy mount params to sb for use in submounts */ + /* BB: should we move this after the mount so we +* do not have to do the copy on failed mounts? +* BB: May be it is better to do simple copy before +* complex operation (mount)

review 2, was Re: projected date for mount.cifs to support DFS junction points

+struct dfs_info3_param { + int flags; /* DFSREF_REFERRAL_SERVER, DFSREF_STORAGE_SERVER*/ + int PathConsumed; + int server_type; + int ref_flag; + char *path_name; + char *node_name; +}; Please avoid mixed case struct member names. + +static inline void init_df

review 1, was Re: projected date for mount.cifs to support DFS junction points

Unfortunately I couldn't find an mbox archive of the cifs client list anywhere, so I'll send you the review in reply to this mail, with one reply per patch. This is for the first patch: + * fs/cifs/cifs_dfs_ref.c Please don't mention file names in top of file comments, they serve no use and g

Re: projected date for mount.cifs to support DFS junction points

On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 02:28:40PM -0600, Steve French wrote: > > to CIFS not supporting DFS junction points. Any projected date for that > > to be supported? > > I anticipate that it will make Linux kernel 2.6.25 (marked > experimental) and eventually in a cifs version 1.53 backported for > olde

Re: [PATCH][RFC] fix reservation discarding in affs

eleased later so no progress on that end. Because this is the last instance of ->put_inode I'd like to move forward on getting rid of it. Is there any chance you could either send me a affs image to run fsx on it or do it yourself? Signed-off-by: Chri

Re: [UNIONFS] 00/29 Unionfs and related patches pre-merge review (v2)

On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 09:59:19AM -0500, Erez Zadok wrote: > > Dear Linus, Al, Christoph, and Andrew, > > As per your request, I'm posting for review the unionfs code (and related > code) that's in my korg tree against mainline (v2.6.24-rc7-71-gfd0b45d). > This is in preparation for merge in 2.6

Re: [PATCH][RFC] fast file mapping for loop

On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 09:44:57AM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote: > > IMHO this shouldn't be done in the loop driver anyway. Filesystems have > > their own effricient extent lookup trees (well, at least xfs and btrfs > > do), and we should leverage that instead of reinventing it. > > Completely agree,

Re: [PATCH][RFC] fast file mapping for loop

On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 12:42:25PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > > So how does it work? Instead of punting IO to a thread and passing it > > through the page cache, we instead attempt to send the IO directly to the > > filesystem block that it maps to. > > You told Christoph that just using direct-I

Re: [PATCH][RFC] fast file mapping for loop

On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 09:52:32AM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote: > - The file block mappings must not change while loop is using the file. > This means that we have to ensure exclusive access to the file and > this is the bit that is currently missing in the implementation. It > would be nice if w

[PATCH] ext2: remove unused ext2_put_inode prototype

Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Index: linux-2.6/fs/ext2/ext2.h === --- linux-2.6.orig/fs/ext2/ext2.h 2007-12-31 10:12:12.0 +0100 +++ linux-2.6/fs/ext2/ext2.h2007-12-31 10:12:15.0

[PATCH] ufs: remove unneeded ufs_put_inode prototype

Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Index: linux-2.6/fs/ufs/ufs.h === --- linux-2.6.orig/fs/ufs/ufs.h 2007-12-31 10:12:42.0 +0100 +++ linux-2.6/fs/ufs/ufs.h 2007-12-31 10:12:46.0 +0100 @@

Re: [RFC] Remove BKL from fs/locks.c

On Sat, Dec 29, 2007 at 11:16:15PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > It seems to work well enough, but I haven't run any serious stress > tests on it. This implementation uses one spinlock to protect both lock > lists and all the i_flock chains. It doesn't seem worth splitting up > the locking an

[PATCH] reiserfs: use open_bdev_excl

Use the proper helper to open a blockdevice by name for filesystem use, this makes sure it's properly claimed (also added for open-by-number) and gets rid of the struct file abuse. Tested by mounting a reiserfs filesystem with external journal. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL P

Re: [0/4] DST: Distributed storage.

> > * fixed bug with XFS metadata update (it can provide slab pages to the > > DST, so it is not allowed to transfer them using ->sendpage()) xfs hasn't been doing that anymore for quite a while. Block drivers don't need hacks for it anymore, epsecially as it's not reliably detectable.

Re: [ANN] Squashfs 3.3 released

On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 02:02:43PM +, Phillip Lougher wrote: > Unfortunately the move to fixed little endian filesystem will involve > another filesystem layout change. The current filesystem layout still > uses packed bitfield structures, and it is impossible to swap these > using the stan

Re: [PATCH 0/2] cramfs: Add mount option "swapendian"

On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 12:46:11PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > It would be *much* better to just standardize on one endianness, and be > > done with it. That way there are no config options, no confusion, and the > > code is smaller, si

Re: [PATCH 0/2] cramfs: Add mount option "swapendian"

On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 12:45:20PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Please don't do it this way. > > It would be *much* better to just standardize on one endianness, and be > done with it. That way there are no config options, no confusion, and the > code is smaller, simpler, and faster. Because n

Re: cramfs in big endian

On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 05:03:01PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Endian-independent code is slower than wrong-endian code, because of the > necessary conditionals. Thus, you DO NOT WANT this(*). I'd prefer not to have it either. But a someone (pinhead) was smart enough not to define an endiane

Re: cramfs in big endian

On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 09:51:48PM +0100, Andi Drebes wrote: > Hi! > > > I would suggest you to use squashfs instead of cramfs. > > First, it's newer, it's better, it's actively developed, it doesn't have any > > limits like the bad cramfs. > I'm developing a new linux based firmware for my route

Re: Problem with accessing namespace_sem from LSM.

On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 07:04:23AM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > The reason why I want to access namespace_sem inside security_inode_create() > is that > it doesn't receive "struct vfsmount" parameter. > If "struct vfsmount" *were* passed to security_inode_create(), > I have no need to access name

Re: Problem with accessing namespace_sem from LSM.

On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 11:52:40PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Hello. > > Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Any code except VFS internals has no business using it at all and doesn't > > do that in mainline either. I'd start looking for design bugs in whatever &

Re: Problem with accessing namespace_sem from LSM.

On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 01:00:41PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Hello. > > I found that accessing namespace_sem from security_inode_create() > causes lockdep warning when compiled with CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y . Any code except VFS internals has no business using it at all and doesn't do that in ma

Re: [PATCH 3/4] VFS: factor out three helpers for FIBMAP/FIONBIO/FIOASYNC file ioctls

On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 01:49:48PM -0400, Erez Zadok wrote: > BTW, what's the origin of this oddity in fs/ioctl.c: > > #ifdef __sparc__ > /* SunOS compatibility item. */ > if (O_NONBLOCK != O_NDELAY) > flag |= O_NDELAY; > #endif > > It seems rather odd to have architectu

Re: [PATCH 2/4] VFS: swap do_ioctl and vfs_ioctl names

On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 08:22:40AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > They are just treated as part of the parameter explanation text. > I don't see any problem with them. Well, it's completely inconsistant with any other kerneldoc.. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fs

Re: [PATCH 3/4] VFS: factor out three helpers for FIBMAP/FIONBIO/FIOASYNC file ioctls

> +static int __ioctl_fibmap(struct file *filp, int __user *p) I'd say kill the __ prefix for all the functions you're adding. > +static int __ioctl_fionbio(struct file *filp, unsigned long arg) > +static int __ioctl_fioasync(unsigned int fd, struct file *filp, > + unsign

Re: [PATCH 2/4] VFS: swap do_ioctl and vfs_ioctl names

On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 08:40:56PM -0400, Erez Zadok wrote: > +/** > + * vfs_ioctl - call filesystem specific ioctl methods > + * > + * @filp: [in] open file to invoke ioctl method on > + * @cmd: [in] ioctl command to execute > + * @arg: [in/out] command-specific argument for ioctl I've

Re: [PATCH 1/3] VFS: apply coding standards to fs/ioctl.c

On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 07:57:47PM -0700, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On 10/28/07, Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > While you're at it, it's probably worth splitting this out into > > a small helper function. > > Why? Is the same pattern calle

Re: [PATCH 1/3] VFS: apply coding standards to fs/ioctl.c

On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 02:05:16PM -0400, Erez Zadok wrote: > > Sure. I assume you mean an internal function to encapsulate the entire case > statement's code, one for each of the FIO* cases. Yes. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a messag

Re: [PATCH 2/3] VFS: swap do_ioctl and vfs_ioctl names

On Sat, Oct 27, 2007 at 07:10:44PM -0400, Erez Zadok wrote: > Rename old vfs_ioctl to do_ioctl, because the comment above it clearly > indicates that it is an internal function not to be exported to modules; > therefore it should have a more traditional do_XXX name. The new do_ioctl > is exported

Re: [PATCH 1/3] VFS: apply coding standards to fs/ioctl.c

Nice, I always hated these double-indented switch statements. > + case FIBMAP: > + { > + struct address_space *mapping = filp->f_mapping; > + int res; > + /* do we support this mess? */ > + if (!mapping->a_ops->bmap) > + r

Re: [RFC 1/2] Case-insensitive XFS - kernel patch

On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 10:32:14AM +1000, Barry Naujok wrote: > On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 06:19:12 +1000, Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > This patch is quite badly mangled by your mailer. Could you just > > attach it? (Or even better use a mailer that

Re: [RFC 1/2] Case-insensitive XFS - kernel patch

This patch is quite badly mangled by your mailer. Could you just attach it? (Or even better use a mailer that handles inlined text without mangling it..) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info a

Re: [PATCH 1/9] Unionfs: security convert lsm into a static interface fix

On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 08:48:04PM -0400, Erez Zadok wrote: > Why? Are you concerned that the security policy may change after a module > is loaded? No, it's a matter of proper layering. We generally don't want modules like stackabke filesystems to call directly into methods but rather use prope

Re: [PATCH 1/9] Unionfs: security convert lsm into a static interface fix

On Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 07:51:14PM -0400, Erez Zadok wrote: > From: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > ERROR: "security_inode_permission" [fs/unionfs/unionfs.ko] undefined! > ERROR: "security_file_ioctl" [fs/unionfs/unionfs.ko] undefined! > > Need these back. These should never used by module

Re: 2.6.23-mm1: BUG in reiserfs_delete_xattrs

On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 10:06:04PM +0200, Laurent Riffard wrote: > > Here's a patch I worked up the other night that kills off struct file > > completely from the xattr code. I've tested it locally. > > Sorry Jeff, your patch does not apply on 2.6.23-mm1. The 'struct file' > removal from reiserfs_

Re: 2.6.23-mm1: BUG in reiserfs_delete_xattrs

On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 02:31:03PM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote: > Here's a patch I worked up the other night that kills off struct file > completely from the xattr code. I've tested it locally. Looks like a merge of Dave's and my patch :) ACK from me, I don't care whether it's one or two patches. -

Re: 2.6.23-mm1: BUG in reiserfs_delete_xattrs

On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 12:34:58AM +0200, Laurent Riffard wrote: > reiserfs_delete_xattrs > reiserfs_delete_inode > generic_delete_inode > generic_drop_inode > iput > do_unlinkat > sys_unlink > sys_enter_past_esp > > I reported a similar BUG in 2.6.22-rc8-mm2 (see > http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/9/27/

Re: RFC: Case-insensitive support for XFS

[Adding -fsdevel because some of the things touched here might be of broader interest and Urban because his name is on nls_utf8.c] On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 11:57:54AM +1000, Barry Naujok wrote: > > On it's own, linux only provides case conversion for old-style > character sets - 8 bit sequences o

Re: [PATCH 06/32] IGET: Mark iget() and read_inode() as being obsolete [try #2]

On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 04:21:04PM +0100, David Howells wrote: > David Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Why do you move it out of line? > > > > Because otherwise every file that gets compiled that includes linux/fs.h > > will > > emit a warning that the implementation of that function

Re: [PATCH 01/32] Add an ERR_CAST() macro to complement ERR_PTR and co. [try #2]

On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 04:56:07PM +0100, David Howells wrote: > Add an ERR_CAST() macro to complement ERR_PTR and co. for the purposes of > casting an error entyped as one pointer type to an error of another pointer > type whilst making it explicit as to what is going on. > > This provides a repl

Re: [PATCH 06/32] IGET: Mark iget() and read_inode() as being obsolete [try #2]

Why do you move it out of line? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 03/32] IGET: Introduce a function to register iget failure [try #2]

On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 04:56:17PM +0100, David Howells wrote: > Introduce a function to register failure in an inode construction path. This > includes marking the inode under construction as bad, unlocking it and > releasing it. I'm a bit unconfortable with the name, but except for that this fu

Re: [PATCH 07/30] IGET: Stop BEFS from using iget() and read_inode()

On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 10:44:59AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > If you're soliciting opinions, I think I tend to prefer the feel of the > > code paths after the changes. I don't know the benefits of the change > > are worth the risk in unmaintained file systems, though. > > > > > + re

Re: Upgrading datastructures between different filesystem versions

On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 03:47:24PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > Ext3 does something similar, zapping space at the beginning AND the > end of the partition (because the MD superblocks are at the end). > It's just a misfeature of reiserfs's mkfs that it doesn't do this. mkfs.xfs of course also whipe

Re: Upgrading datastructures between different filesystem versions

On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 03:11:00PM +0200, Erik Mouw wrote: > There are however ways to confuse it: if you reformat an ext3 > filesystem to reiserfs (version 3), mounting that filesystem without > "-t reiserfs" will trick mount(8) into mounting it as an ext3 > filesystem (which will usually fail). T

[RFC][PATCH] stop abusing filp_open in reiserfs journal code

And here's a patch to stop the filp abuse in the journal code. An additional benefit is that the block device is now properly claimed when opened by device number. Index: linux-2.6/fs/reiserfs/journal.c === --- linux-2.6.orig/fs/rei

Re: [RFC][PATCH] make reiserfs stop using 'struct file' for internal xattr operations

On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 02:51:25PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > That'll be because reiserfs-convert-to-new-aops.patch witched reiserfs over > to ->write_begin() and ->write_end(). Yeah, I was looking at mainline. > So your stuff becomes dependent on Nick's stuff, and Nick's stuff is still > fail

Re: [RFC][PATCH] make reiserfs stop using 'struct file' for internal xattr operations

On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 01:53:39PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > -int reiserfs_commit_write(struct file *f, struct page *page, > - unsigned from, unsigned to); > -int reiserfs_prepare_write(struct file *f, struct page *page, > -unsigned from, unsigned to)

Re: 2.6.23-rc8-mm2: BUG near reiserfs_xattr_set

On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 12:48:33PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > __fput+0x124/0x1a9 > > fput+0x31/0x35 > > reiserfs_xattr_set+0x291/0x2b0 [reiserfs] > > user_set+0x4c/0x57 [reiserfs] > > reiserfs_setxattr+0x81/0xf1 [reiserfs] > > vfs_setxattr+0x7d/0xfa > > setxattr+0xb9/0xd1 > > sys_lsetx

Re: [PATCH 05/25] Unionfs: cast page->index loff_t before shifting

On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 11:09:44PM -0400, Erez Zadok wrote: > Fixes bugs in number promotion/demotion computation, as per > It's better to use te page_offset helper as that avoids any confusion on where to cast. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "u

Re: [patch 1/2] VFS: new fgetattr() file operation

On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 03:18:10PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > Or not support such a broken protocol at all. > > Wonder what people would say if we removed support for NFSv[23]. > > Just because a protocol does not support "perfect" UNIX semantics, it > doesn't mean it's broken. By that sta

Re: [patch 1/2] VFS: new fgetattr() file operation

On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 03:06:06PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > If a network filesystem protocol can't handle operations (be it data > or metadata) on an unlinked file, we must do sillirenaming, so that > the file is not actually unlinked. Or not support such a broken protocol at all. - To unsu

Re: [patch 2/2] VFS: allow filesystem to override mknod capability checks

On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 02:25:54PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > From: Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Add a new super block flag, that results in the VFS not checking if > the current process has enough privileges to do an mknod(). > > If this flag is set, all mounts for this super block

Re: [patch 1/2] VFS: new fgetattr() file operation

On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 02:24:54PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > Thanks to everyone for the feedback. Here's two of the VFS patches > reworked according to comments. I also plan to rework the setattr() > patch accordingly and perhaps the xattr patch, altough that is the > lowest priority. > > C

Re: [patch 5/5] VFS: allow filesystem to override mknod capability checks

On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 04:48:58PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > Ah, OK. Well, that's what fuse would do with the above change. So > you are basically saying, the change is OK, but we want proper > unprivileged mounts first. Yes, that and that it should be a mount flag, not a file_system_type f

Re: [patch 3/5] VFS: pass open file to ->xattr()

On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 10:32:31AM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Fri, 2007-09-21 at 15:16 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > > ftruncate is a special case due to O_TRUNC. > > > > No, it's special, because it does not do permission checking, while > > truncate() does. > > So why not just add

Re: [patch 5/5] VFS: allow filesystem to override mknod capability checks

On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 03:18:33PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > That's something that shouldn't be solved in the filesystem, but rather > > through exact semantics of unprivilegued mounts. Given that an > > unprivilegued implies ignoring the device files we can easily allow > > users to create

Re: [patch 5/5] VFS: allow filesystem to override mknod capability checks

On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 03:10:26PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > Take this example: I've loopback mounted an UML disk image using fuse > (no privileges required), and want to create some device nodes. I > can't yet boot the UML because the device node is missing from the > image. So what should

Re: [patch 3/5] VFS: pass open file to ->xattr()

On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 03:00:06PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > I don't think it's silly. Read/write get passed the file descriptor, > and it makes a lot of sense, if the filesystem has stateful opens. > > Similarly for any fs operation that gets a file descriptor, it makes > sense to pass the

Re: [patch 5/5] VFS: allow filesystem to override mknod capability checks

On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 02:23:48PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > From: Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Add a new filesystem flag, that results in the VFS not checking if the > current process has enough privileges to do an mknod(). > > This is needed on filesystems, where an unprivileged

Re: [patch 4/5] VFS: allow filesystems to implement atomic open+truncate

On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 02:23:47PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > From: Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Add a new attribute flag ATTR_OPEN, with the meaning: "truncation was > initiated by open() due to the O_TRUNC flag". > > This way filesystems wanting to implement truncation within thei

Re: [patch 3/5] VFS: pass open file to ->xattr()

On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 02:23:46PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > From: Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Pass the open file into the filesystem's *xattr() methods. > > This is needed to be able to correctly implement open-unlink-f*xattr > semantics, without having to resort to "silly-renami

  1   2   3   4   5   >