Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758264AbXHaI3N (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Aug 2007 04:29:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754375AbXHaI27 (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Aug 2007 04:28:59 -0400 Received: from frankvm.xs4all.nl ([80.126.170.174]:60211 "EHLO janus.localdomain" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753797AbXHaI26 (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Aug 2007 04:28:58 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 891 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 04:28:58 EDT Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 10:28:56 +0200 From: Frank van Maarseveen To: Jakob Oestergaard , Linus Torvalds , Trond Myklebust , Frank van Maarseveen , Hua Zhong , "'Linux Kernel Mailing List'" , akpm@linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression Message-ID: <20070831082856.GB21499@janus> References: <000701c7eb49$cff701c0$6fe50540$@com> <1188513433.6626.24.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> <1188535485.6626.85.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> <1188536658.6626.98.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> <20070831074028.GR21979@unthought.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070831074028.GR21979@unthought.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1665 Lines: 41 On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 09:40:28AM +0200, Jakob Oestergaard wrote: > On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 10:16:37PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > ... > > > Why aren't we doing that for any other filesystem than NFS? > > > > How hard is it to acknowledge the following little word: > > > > "regression" > > > > It's simple. You broke things. You may want to fix them, but you need to > > fix them in a way that does not break user space. > > Trond has a point Linus. > > What he "broke" is, for example, a ro mount being mounted as rw. > > That *could* be a very serious security (etc.etc.) problem which he just fixed. > Anything depending on read-only not being enforced will cease to work, of > course, and that is what a few people complain about(!). > > If ext3 in some rare case (which would still mean it hit a few thousand users) > failed to remember that a file had been marked read-only and allowed writes to > it, wouldn't we want to fix that too? It would cause regressions, but we'd fix > it, right? > > mount passes back the error code on a failed mount. autofs passes that error > along too (when people configure syslog correctly). In short; when these > serious mistakes are made and caught, the admin sees an error in his logs. Hua explained already that seeing the error is not the same as fixing the error: he cannot fix it because NFS implies other systems we _must_ co-operate with. -- Frank - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/