From: Ian Kent <ikent@redhat.com>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>,
"viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk" <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>,
Trond Myklebust <trondmy@primarydata.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"mkoutny@suse.com" <mkoutny@suse.com>,
"linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Do we really need d_weak_revalidate???
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 12:58:55 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <40aa347f-43eb-faf7-d6b7-dce6897f8a85@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87inhdk3rq.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>
On 24/08/17 12:07, NeilBrown wrote:
>
>
> The more precise details, that automount action for indirect automount
> points is not triggered when the 'browse' option is used, is probably
> not necessary.
>
> Ian: if you agree with that text, and Michael doesn't provide alternate
> evidence, I'll submit a formal patch for the man page.... or should we
> just wait until the patch actually lands?
So far only David commented about using ENOENT rather than EREMOTE.
I prefer ENOENT for this case myself and he didn't object when I
explained why, David, any concerns?
Al has been silent so far so either he hasn't seen it or he's ok with
it, Al, any concerns?
And I guess if there are no concerns there's a good chance Andrew is
ok with it for the next merge window, Andrew?
If everyone agrees then we could go ahead immediately so there's a
better chance of getting it into released man pages closer to the
change being merged.
Ian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-24 4:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-11 4:31 Do we really need d_weak_revalidate??? NeilBrown
2017-08-11 5:55 ` Trond Myklebust
2017-08-11 11:01 ` Jeff Layton
2017-08-13 23:36 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-14 10:10 ` Jeff Layton
2017-08-16 2:43 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-16 11:34 ` Jeff Layton
2017-08-16 23:47 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-17 2:20 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-18 5:24 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-18 6:47 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-18 6:55 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-21 6:23 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-21 6:32 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-21 7:46 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-23 1:06 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-23 2:32 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-23 2:40 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-23 2:54 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-23 7:51 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-24 3:21 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-24 4:35 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-24 4:07 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-24 4:47 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-24 4:58 ` Ian Kent [this message]
2017-08-24 11:03 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2017-08-25 0:05 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-25 5:32 ` [PATCH manpages] stat.2: correct AT_NO_AUTOMOUNT text and general revisions NeilBrown
2017-09-14 13:38 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2017-09-14 22:25 ` NeilBrown
2017-09-16 13:11 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2017-09-08 15:15 ` Do we really need d_weak_revalidate??? David Howells
2017-08-13 23:29 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-24 6:34 ` NeilBrown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=40aa347f-43eb-faf7-d6b7-dce6897f8a85@redhat.com \
--to=ikent@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
--cc=neilb@suse.com \
--cc=trondmy@primarydata.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).