[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090119191729.GB24852@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 20:17:29 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
Cc: Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, hpa@...or.com,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] autofs: fix the wrong usage of the deprecated
task_pgrp_nr()
On 01/19, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>
> Quoting Oleg Nesterov (oleg@...hat.com):
> > On 01/19, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > >
> > > But so there does still need to be a patch modifying parse_options()
> > > to return an error if pgrp= was not specified, right?
> >
> > Why? In that case we should use the caller's pgrp. This is what the
> > current tries to do, why should the patch change this behaviour?
>
> Well, because Ian said that not specifying it is supposed to
> be an error :) I didn't quite understand why, so am fishing
> for more info...
I think you misunderstood him. Or I am totally confused ;)
In any case. Both autofs and autofs4 use current's pgrp if this
option was not specified, and these patches doesn't change this
behaviour.
Actually, I am very much surprized this one-liner patch has so
many questions. Isn't it "obiously correct" ?
Oleg.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists