Re: [PATCH] proc: Fix proc_kill_inodes to kill dentries on all proc superblocks


On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> 
> It appears we overlooked support for removing generic proc files
> when we added support for multiple proc super blocks.  Handle
> that now.

There seems to be more users of "proc_mnt" out there. proc_flush_task, 
anyone?

		Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Follow-Ups:
- [PATCH] proc: Simplify and correct proc_flush_task
  - From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: [PATCH] proc: Fix proc_kill_inodes to kill dentries on all proc superblocks
  - From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)

References:
- [PATCH] proc: Fix proc_kill_inodes to kill dentries on all proc superblocks
  - From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)

Prev by Date: Re: Is gcc thread-unsafe?
Next by Date: RE: Is gcc thread-unsafe?
Previous by thread: [PATCH] proc: Fix proc_kill_inodes to kill dentries on all proc superblocks
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] proc: Fix proc_kill_inodes to kill dentries on all proc superblocks
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Kernel Newbies] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Photo] [Stuff] [Gimp] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Video 4 Linux] [Linux for the blind] [Linux Resources]