Quoting Ian Kent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> How does this affect getting ids for waitq request packets of other user
> space processes triggering mounts? I'm guessing that they would need to
> belong to the appropriate namespace for this mechanism to funtion
> correctly.
A feature of the pid
Ian Kent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> btw please don't be confused by my use of "user space application". In
> my comments I'm talking about applications that are similar in function
> to autofs itself and not processes that might trigger mounts. For
> example the "autodir" package uses the
Ian Kent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 15:58 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>> PS
>> Note that if I'm right, but some machine starts autofs in a child
>> pid_namespace, the pid_nr() the way I have it is wrong. I'm not sure in
>> that case how we go about fixing that.
On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 08:31 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > >
> > > From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Subject: [PATCH] autofs: prevent pid wraparound in waitqs
> > >
> > > Instead of storing pid numbers for waitqs, store references
> > > to struct pids. Also store a reference
On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 15:33 +0100, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 11:28:43AM +0900, Ian Kent wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 15:58 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > > "Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > >
> >
On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 08:31 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Ian Kent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 21:19 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > Quoting Ian Kent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > > On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 16:01 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > > > > "Serge E.
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 11:28:43AM +0900, Ian Kent wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 15:58 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > "Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > >> > void autofs4_dentry_release(struct dentry *);
> > > >> >
Quoting Ian Kent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 21:19 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > Quoting Ian Kent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 16:01 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > > > "Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > >
> > > > >> > void
Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> "Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > So is the pid used for anything other than debugging?
> >
> > In any case, here is a replacement patch which sends the pid number
> > in the pid_namespace of the process which did the autofs4
Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So is the pid used for anything other than debugging?
In any case, here is a replacement patch which sends the pid number
in the pid_namespace of the process which did the autofs4 mount.
Still
Quoting Ian Kent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 21:19 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
Quoting Ian Kent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 16:01 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
void autofs4_dentry_release(struct
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 11:28:43AM +0900, Ian Kent wrote:
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 15:58 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
void autofs4_dentry_release(struct dentry *);
extern void
On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 08:31 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
Quoting Ian Kent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 21:19 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
Quoting Ian Kent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 16:01 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL
On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 15:33 +0100, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 11:28:43AM +0900, Ian Kent wrote:
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 15:58 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
void
On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 08:31 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
From: Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PATCH] autofs: prevent pid wraparound in waitqs
Instead of storing pid numbers for waitqs, store references
to struct pids. Also store a reference to the mounter's pid
Ian Kent [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 15:58 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
PS
Note that if I'm right, but some machine starts autofs in a child
pid_namespace, the pid_nr() the way I have it is wrong. I'm not sure in
that case how we go about fixing that. Somehow we need
Ian Kent [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
btw please don't be confused by my use of user space application. In
my comments I'm talking about applications that are similar in function
to autofs itself and not processes that might trigger mounts. For
example the autodir package uses the autofs
Quoting Ian Kent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
How does this affect getting ids for waitq request packets of other user
space processes triggering mounts? I'm guessing that they would need to
belong to the appropriate namespace for this mechanism to funtion
correctly.
A feature of the pid namespaces
"Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> So is the pid used for anything other than debugging?
>
> In any case, here is a replacement patch which sends the pid number
> in the pid_namespace of the process which did the autofs4 mount.
>
> Still not sure whether that is actually what makes
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 21:19 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Ian Kent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 16:01 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > > "Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > >> > void autofs4_dentry_release(struct dentry *);
> > > >> > extern
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 15:58 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > "Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > >> > void autofs4_dentry_release(struct dentry *);
> > >> > extern void autofs4_kill_sb(struct super_block *);
> > >> > diff --git
Quoting Ian Kent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 16:01 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > "Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > >> > void autofs4_dentry_release(struct dentry *);
> > >> > extern void autofs4_kill_sb(struct super_block *);
> > >> > diff --git
On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 16:01 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> "Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> > void autofs4_dentry_release(struct dentry *);
> >> > extern void autofs4_kill_sb(struct super_block *);
> >> > diff --git a/fs/autofs4/waitq.c b/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
> >> > index
Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> "Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> > void autofs4_dentry_release(struct dentry *);
> >> > extern void autofs4_kill_sb(struct super_block *);
> >> > diff --git a/fs/autofs4/waitq.c b/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
> >> > index
Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
void autofs4_dentry_release(struct dentry *);
extern void autofs4_kill_sb(struct super_block *);
diff --git a/fs/autofs4/waitq.c b/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
index 9857543..4a9ad9b 100644
---
On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 16:01 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
void autofs4_dentry_release(struct dentry *);
extern void autofs4_kill_sb(struct super_block *);
diff --git a/fs/autofs4/waitq.c b/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
index 9857543..4a9ad9b 100644
Quoting Ian Kent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 16:01 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
void autofs4_dentry_release(struct dentry *);
extern void autofs4_kill_sb(struct super_block *);
diff --git a/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 15:58 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
void autofs4_dentry_release(struct dentry *);
extern void autofs4_kill_sb(struct super_block *);
diff --git a/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 21:19 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
Quoting Ian Kent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 16:01 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
void autofs4_dentry_release(struct dentry *);
extern void
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So is the pid used for anything other than debugging?
In any case, here is a replacement patch which sends the pid number
in the pid_namespace of the process which did the autofs4 mount.
Still not sure whether that is actually what makes sense...
"Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > void autofs4_dentry_release(struct dentry *);
>> > extern void autofs4_kill_sb(struct super_block *);
>> > diff --git a/fs/autofs4/waitq.c b/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
>> > index 9857543..4a9ad9b 100644
>> > --- a/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
>> > +++
Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> "Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > So how about the following on top of the patch Cedric sent out?
> >
> > Subject: [PATCH] autofs4: store struct pids in autofs_waitqs
> > From: Serge Hallyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: 1174412305
"Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So how about the following on top of the patch Cedric sent out?
>
> Subject: [PATCH] autofs4: store struct pids in autofs_waitqs
> From: Serge Hallyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 1174412305 -0500
>
> Store struct pids in autofs_waitqs in place of
Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> "Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >>
> >> >> Index: 2.6.20/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
> >> >> ===
> >> >> --- 2.6.20.orig/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
> >> >> +++
Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Index: 2.6.20/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
===
--- 2.6.20.orig/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
+++ 2.6.20/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
@@ -292,8 +292,8 @@
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So how about the following on top of the patch Cedric sent out?
Subject: [PATCH] autofs4: store struct pids in autofs_waitqs
From: Serge Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 1174412305 -0500
Store struct pids in autofs_waitqs in place of pidnrs to
Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So how about the following on top of the patch Cedric sent out?
Subject: [PATCH] autofs4: store struct pids in autofs_waitqs
From: Serge Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 1174412305 -0500
Store
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
void autofs4_dentry_release(struct dentry *);
extern void autofs4_kill_sb(struct super_block *);
diff --git a/fs/autofs4/waitq.c b/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
index 9857543..4a9ad9b 100644
--- a/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
+++ b/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
@@ -141,8
"Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> True, current->pid can probably always be legitimately taken as the pid
> number in the current task's cloning namespace. But task->pid is
> wrong.
Agreed.
> So if as you say it's worth caching (not saying I doubt you, just that I
> haven't
Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> "Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >>
> >> >> Index: 2.6.20/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
> >> >> ===
> >> >> --- 2.6.20.orig/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
> >> >> +++
"Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> >> Index: 2.6.20/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
>> >> ===
>> >> --- 2.6.20.orig/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
>> >> +++ 2.6.20/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
>> >> @@ -292,8 +292,8 @@ int autofs4_wait(struct
Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Ian Kent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 15:44 +0100, Cedric Le Goater wrote:
> >> > How about you send over the autofs4 bit and I'll have a look (the autofs
> >> > patch looked fine). That would save me a bit of time and if
Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Ian Kent [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 15:44 +0100, Cedric Le Goater wrote:
How about you send over the autofs4 bit and I'll have a look (the autofs
patch looked fine). That would save me a bit of time and if there are
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Index: 2.6.20/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
===
--- 2.6.20.orig/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
+++ 2.6.20/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
@@ -292,8 +292,8 @@ int autofs4_wait(struct autofs_sb_info *
Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Index: 2.6.20/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
===
--- 2.6.20.orig/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
+++ 2.6.20/fs/autofs4/waitq.c
@@ -292,8 +292,8 @@
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
True, current-pid can probably always be legitimately taken as the pid
number in the current task's cloning namespace. But task-pid is
wrong.
Agreed.
So if as you say it's worth caching (not saying I doubt you, just that I
haven't verified), then
Ian Kent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 15:44 +0100, Cedric Le Goater wrote:
>> > How about you send over the autofs4 bit and I'll have a look (the autofs
>> > patch looked fine). That would save me a bit of time and if there are
>> > any changes needed I can send an updated
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 15:44 +0100, Cedric Le Goater wrote:
> > How about you send over the autofs4 bit and I'll have a look (the autofs
> > patch looked fine). That would save me a bit of time and if there are
> > any changes needed I can send an updated patch for you guys to review. I
> > don't
> How about you send over the autofs4 bit and I'll have a look (the autofs
> patch looked fine). That would save me a bit of time and if there are
> any changes needed I can send an updated patch for you guys to review. I
> don't think autofs4 uses pids differently, in principle, than autofs so
>
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 05:32 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Ian Kent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Mon, 12 Mar 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Replace pid_t in autofs with struct pid reference.
> >>
>
Ian Kent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 12 Mar 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>
>> From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Replace pid_t in autofs with struct pid reference.
>>
>> Make autofs container-friendly by caching struct pid reference rather
>>
Ian Kent [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Replace pid_t in autofs with struct pid reference.
Make autofs container-friendly by caching struct pid reference rather
than pid_t and using
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 05:32 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Ian Kent [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Replace pid_t in autofs with struct pid reference.
Make autofs
How about you send over the autofs4 bit and I'll have a look (the autofs
patch looked fine). That would save me a bit of time and if there are
any changes needed I can send an updated patch for you guys to review. I
don't think autofs4 uses pids differently, in principle, than autofs so
it
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 15:44 +0100, Cedric Le Goater wrote:
How about you send over the autofs4 bit and I'll have a look (the autofs
patch looked fine). That would save me a bit of time and if there are
any changes needed I can send an updated patch for you guys to review. I
don't think
Ian Kent [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 15:44 +0100, Cedric Le Goater wrote:
How about you send over the autofs4 bit and I'll have a look (the autofs
patch looked fine). That would save me a bit of time and if there are
any changes needed I can send an updated patch for
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Replace pid_t in autofs with struct pid reference.
>
> Make autofs container-friendly by caching struct pid reference rather
> than pid_t and using pid_nr() to retreive a
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Replace pid_t in autofs with struct pid reference.
Make autofs container-friendly by caching struct pid reference rather
than pid_t and using pid_nr() to retreive a task's pid_t.
58 matches
Mail list logo
