Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com> wrote: > I think Al had a good idea there, that is nice and clean. What about bind > mounts, will that just fall out? I don't see that it should be a problem since the vfsmount is copied. David - 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/
- References:
- Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
- Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
- recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- From: "Hua Zhong" <hzhong@gmail.com>
- Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
- Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
- Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
- Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
- Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- Prev by Date: Re: patch: improve generic_file_buffered_write()
- Next by Date: Re: Macbook bug after suspend to disk
- Previous by thread: Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- Next by thread: Re: recent nfs change causes autofs regression
- Index(es):
 |