From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751728Ab3JEB5Q (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Oct 2013 21:57:16 -0400 Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.232]:45826 "EHLO out02.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751257Ab3JEB5O (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Oct 2013 21:57:14 -0400 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Miklos Szeredi , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Al Viro , Linux-Fsdevel , Kernel Mailing List , Andy Lutomirski , Rob Landley References: <87a9kkax0j.fsf@xmission.com> <8761v7h2pt.fsf@tw-ebiederman.twitter.com> <87li281wx6.fsf_-_@xmission.com> <8761tctwhg.fsf@xmission.com> Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2013 18:57:00 -0700 In-Reply-To: <8761tctwhg.fsf@xmission.com> (Eric W. Biederman's message of "Fri, 04 Oct 2013 17:03:23 -0700") Message-ID: <87fvsgo4yb.fsf@xmission.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX1823jM4CaqeXsRetOiOOZncbMlU7Hn39LI= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 98.207.154.105 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 1.5 XMNoVowels Alpha-numberic number with no vowels * 1.5 TR_Symld_Words too many words that have symbols inside * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG * -3.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa02 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.0 T_TooManySym_01 4+ unique symbols in subject X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa02 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;Linus Torvalds X-Spam-Relay-Country: Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] vfs: Detach mounts on unlink. X-Spam-Flag: No X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 14 Nov 2012 14:26:46 -0700) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) writes: > I just noticed that Al's latest vfs changes posted yesterday mean I need > to rebase and possibly respin these patches, as all of the locking and > interesting bits of the dcache have changed. I don't think the > conflicts would be fun to resolve during the merge window. On second look the only conflict is the rename of the vfsmount_lock to lock_mount_hash, and a few bits of context. So nothing interesting. Eric