Subject: Re: [PATCH] VFS: Suppress automount on [l]stat, [l]getxattr, etc.
From: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>, Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
        gregkh@suse.de, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, leonardo.lists@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 17:13:46 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFzJnKCHtsiH-mZOwQgVt1ajPJQHWRYB_19eXEKaGRPD1w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+55aFyd3QB-vfp9Vm6S6_YRCXO9pNE2YavYZhmO+5g6YfdERA@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1316747758.3346.89.camel@perseus.themaw.net>
	 <20110922134510.24683.14576.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
	 <1316707443.3346.44.camel@perseus.themaw.net>
	 <CA+55aFxGxv5DGAQcgn1avwUcW1xZVvz1VEajF6zT5HHiVEsJ2w@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1316709935.3346.48.camel@perseus.themaw.net>
	 <20110922133529.6d3ea8de@barsoom.rdu.redhat.com>
	 <20110922144453.6cf53a25@barsoom.rdu.redhat.com>
	 <1316719228.3968.14.camel@lade.trondhjem.org>
	 <CA+55aFxEAZG2dz3X44OUDqmqv8P-6AJ-eiKVBGfC5+=3C_c+1A@mail.gmail.com>
	 <2E1EB2CF9ED1CB4AA966F0EB76EAB4430B480BD4@SACMVEXC2-PRD.hq.netapp.com>
	 <CA+55aFx9XbKV7xNR-Vs7NhyDE=vmX7Zr=U2YB=omvcae_ye9XQ@mail.gmail.com>
	 <21772.1316774025@redhat.com>
	 <1316788444.14812.10.camel@lade.trondhjem.org>
	 <29743.1316791138@redhat.com> <87hb43tf2g.fsf@tucsk.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
	 <1316827854.3346.154.camel@perseus.themaw.net>
	 <CA+55aFwPEq5B_P0RtX+pBtGfTadzzS+3U=k=3XTjDw3soNhOdA@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20110924073610.4b045189@tlielax.poochiereds.net>
	 <CA+55aFxjFXbCKBZNfBuCOaiBHRQ=ZECnhqKxjPw9maPgyRLiDA@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1317013864.3187.81.camel@perseus.themaw.net>
	 <CA+55aFzJnKCHtsiH-mZOwQgVt1ajPJQHWRYB_19eXEKaGRPD1w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-ID: <1317071626.19951.8.camel@lade.trondhjem.org>
Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org
MIME-Version: 1.0

On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 13:48 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: 
> What are the downsides of just adding the one or two
> LOOKUP_DIRECTORY/LOOKUP_OPEN flags?
> 
> Nobody has even *mentioned* any downsides. So I don't think this is
> controversial, and I don't understand why you consider it
> controversial.

LOOKUP_OPEN flags an open intent and will therefore have side-effects on
NFSv4.

Cheers
  Trond
-- 
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer

NetApp
Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com
www.netapp.com