On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 03:41:44PM +0530, Sachin Prabhu wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-11-17 at 10:47 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 07:01:45AM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:27:56AM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Sep 22,
Hi Greg,
Greg Kroah-Hartman writes:
> What ever happened with this? Did the patch end up in Linus's tree? If
> so, what was the git commit id?
It did, commit is
d171356ff11ab1825e456dfb979755e01b3c54a1
Cheers,
--
Aurélien Aptel / SUSE Labs Samba Team
GPG: 1839 CB5F 9F5B FB9B AA97 8C99 03C8
On Thu, 2016-11-17 at 10:47 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 07:01:45AM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:27:56AM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 04:17:09PM +0100, Sachin Prabhu wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 20
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 07:01:45AM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:27:56AM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 04:17:09PM +0100, Sachin Prabhu wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2016-09-22 at 10:09 -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> > > > We've received reports from users of
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:27:56AM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 04:17:09PM +0100, Sachin Prabhu wrote:
> > On Thu, 2016-09-22 at 10:09 -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> > > We've received reports from users of a cifs mount regression in our
> > > 4.4-based kernel, e.g. [1]. It is
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 04:17:09PM +0100, Sachin Prabhu wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-09-22 at 10:09 -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> > We've received reports from users of a cifs mount regression in our
> > 4.4-based kernel, e.g. [1]. It is fixed by reverting the follwing
> > commit
> > from 4.8 which was app
On Thu, 2016-09-22 at 10:09 -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> We've received reports from users of a cifs mount regression in our
> 4.4-based kernel, e.g. [1]. It is fixed by reverting the follwing
> commit
> from 4.8 which was applied to 4.4 stable:
>
> a6b5058 fs/cifs: make share unaccessible at roo
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:09:18AM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> We've received reports from users of a cifs mount regression in our
> 4.4-based kernel, e.g. [1]. It is fixed by reverting the follwing commit
> from 4.8 which was applied to 4.4 stable:
>
> a6b5058 fs/cifs: make share unaccessible a
We've received reports from users of a cifs mount regression in our
4.4-based kernel, e.g. [1]. It is fixed by reverting the follwing commit
from 4.8 which was applied to 4.4 stable:
a6b5058 fs/cifs: make share unaccessible at root level mountable
Testing against 4.8-rc7 shows that the problem i
9 matches
Mail list logo