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]