Linux-Fsdevel Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>,
	viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@redhat.com>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: User-visible context-mount API
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 11:43:35 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180117104335.m3oo3ee2xmercau3@ws.net.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <22576.1516097412@warthog.procyon.org.uk>

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 10:10:12AM +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Inside the kernel the MS_* flags appear to belong to a number of fundamentally
> different classes:

Good point, but I'm not sure about your terminology -- for example
"topology" sounds strange if we use "propagation" for years.

>  (1) Things like MS_SILENT and MS_REMOUNT which affect the behaviour of the
>      mount process, but aren't persistent beyond that.

 mount-operation flags  (now including MS_BIND too)

>  (2) Inter-namespace topology management, controlling how mounts are shared
>      and duplicated between namespaces.

 propagation flags

>  (3) Restrictions on accesses through a particular mountpoint, eg. MS_NODEV,
>      MS_NOEXEC.

 VFS flags (now including MS_BIND|MS_REMOUNT|MS_RDONLY too)

>  (4) Instructions to a filesystem on how a superblock is to behave.

 FS flags

> I think the classes are fundamentally different - and we've already separated
> (4) from the others inside the kernel.  However, I've no great objection to
> keeping (2) and (3) together in the same mask.  It just sounds cleaner to
> separate them. 

 I agree.

    Karel

-- 
 Karel Zak  <kzak@redhat.com>
 http://karelzak.blogspot.com

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-01-17 10:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-01-15 16:07 David Howells
2018-01-15 17:31 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-01-15 17:32 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-01-16  9:01 ` Miklos Szeredi
2018-01-16 10:10 ` David Howells
2018-01-16 10:35   ` Miklos Szeredi
2018-01-16 14:18   ` David Howells
2018-01-17 10:43   ` Karel Zak [this message]
2018-01-16 14:55 ` David Howells
2018-01-16 15:40 ` David Howells
2018-01-16 16:41   ` Miklos Szeredi
2018-01-17  4:17     ` Al Viro
2018-01-17  9:53       ` Miklos Szeredi
2018-01-17 11:06         ` Karel Zak
2018-01-18  9:48           ` Miklos Szeredi
2018-01-19  2:27           ` Al Viro
2018-01-19  6:32         ` Al Viro

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180117104335.m3oo3ee2xmercau3@ws.net.home \
    --to=kzak@redhat.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@redhat.com \
    --cc=jlayton@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mszeredi@redhat.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --subject='Re: User-visible context-mount API' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).