From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758734Ab2D1B4a (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Apr 2012 21:56:30 -0400 Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:59846 "EHLO out1-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758346Ab2D1B43 (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Apr 2012 21:56:29 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: ghdV2g/Svl18xEXug8zVhTNAAABZmD9vHzb5VE3zSZD6M7ZpvnlSzV++UQ 1335578187 Message-ID: <1335578184.4141.9.camel@perseus.themaw.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Introduce a version6 of autofs interface, to fix design error. From: Ian Kent To: David Miller Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, mjt@tls.msk.ru, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, autofs@vger.kernel.org, thomas@m3y3r.de, stable@kernel.org Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2012 09:56:24 +0800 In-Reply-To: <20120427.151433.1007849975903946491.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20120427.143402.1028957981042061092.davem@davemloft.net> <20120427.151433.1007849975903946491.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3 (3.2.3-2.fc16) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2012-04-27 at 15:14 -0400, David Miller wrote: > From: Linus Torvalds > Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 11:55:12 -0700 > > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Linus Torvalds > > wrote: > >> > >> There's no question that systemd is broken. > > > > Actually, I'll take that back. > > > > Yes, systemd has breakage. But it's actually automount that is the > > truly broken piece of sh*t. > > > > I think that 'automount' is even more broken. The fact that the > > automount maintainers knew about this, and added TOTALLY BROKEN code > > to their automount source tree, over five years ago, because the > > authors clearly did not understand what the f*ck they were doing, > > that's the real problem. > > I respectfully disagree. > > It's ugly as shit, but it is the only one place where one can be > absolutely sure that we are dealing with a pipe passing those v5 > things around. > > All these hacks we have been talking about, assuming the mount means > the pipe is for passing structure so-and-so around, and now trying > to find some other check such as one on current->comm... > > That's better? > > Only the application really knows. And I bet the person who wrote > that automountd code you find so distasteful analyzed this and came > to realize how difficult the kernel side would be to get right. There's nothing I can say in my defense, Linus has made that very clear, over and again. When I realized the alignment mistake there were already shipping binaries so I decided it was too late to change that. And I see I got the analysis of the architectures alignment wrong, mmmm, that's bad as well. I guess I'll just be quiet now since anything I say is probably going to be wrong. Ian