[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20210820135707.171001-1-jlayton@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 09:57:05 -0400
From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
To: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: ebiederm@...ssion.com, david@...hat.com, willy@...radead.org,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org, cluster-devel@...hat.com,
ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, luto@...nel.org, bfields@...ldses.org,
w@....eu, rostedt@...dmis.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/2] fs: remove support for mandatory locking
The first patch in this series adds a new warning that should pop on
kernels have mandatory locking enabled when someone mounts a filesystem
with -o mand. The second patch removes support for mandatory locking
altogether.
What I think we probably want to do is apply the first to v5.14 before
it ships and allow the new warning to trickle out into stable kernels.
Then we can merge the second patch in v5.15 to go ahead and remove it.
Sound like a plan?
Jeff Layton (2):
fs: warn about impending deprecation of mandatory locks
fs: remove mandatory file locking support
.../filesystems/mandatory-locking.rst | 188 ------------------
fs/9p/vfs_file.c | 12 --
fs/Kconfig | 10 -
fs/afs/flock.c | 4 -
fs/ceph/locks.c | 3 -
fs/gfs2/file.c | 3 -
fs/locks.c | 116 +----------
fs/namei.c | 4 +-
fs/namespace.c | 31 +--
fs/nfs/file.c | 4 -
fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 13 --
fs/nfsd/vfs.c | 15 --
fs/ocfs2/locks.c | 4 -
fs/open.c | 8 +-
fs/read_write.c | 7 -
fs/remap_range.c | 10 -
include/linux/fs.h | 84 --------
mm/mmap.c | 6 -
mm/nommu.c | 3 -
19 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 505 deletions(-)
delete mode 100644 Documentation/filesystems/mandatory-locking.rst
--
2.31.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists