linux-api.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>
Cc: Askar Safin <safinaskar@mail.ru>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: What about adding AT_NO_AUTOMOUNT analogue to openat2?
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2020 07:45:30 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200411064530.GL23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200411060236.swlgw6ymzikgcqxl@yavin.dot.cyphar.com>

On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 04:02:36PM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
> On 2020-04-11, Askar Safin <safinaskar@mail.ru> wrote:
> > What about adding stat's AT_NO_AUTOMOUNT analogue to openat2?
> 
> There isn't one. I did intend to add RESOLVE_NO_AUTOMOUNTS after openat2
> was merged -- it's even mentioned in the commit message -- but I haven't
> gotten around to it yet. The reason it wasn't added from the outset was
> that I wasn't sure if adding it would be as simple as the other
> RESOLVE_* flags.
> 
> Note that like all RESOLVE_* flags, it would apply to all components so
> it wouldn't be truly analogous with AT_NO_AUTOMOUNT (though as I've
> discussed at length on this ML, most people do actually want the
> RESOLVE_* semantics). But you can emulate the AT_* ones much more easily
> with RESOLVE_* than vice-versa).

Er...  Not triggering automount on anything but the last component means
failing with ENOENT.  *All* automount points are empty and are bloody
well going to remain such, as far as I'm concerned.

  reply	other threads:[~2020-04-11  6:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-04-10 22:41 What about adding AT_NO_AUTOMOUNT analogue to openat2? Askar Safin
2020-04-11  6:02 ` Aleksa Sarai
2020-04-11  6:45   ` Al Viro [this message]
2020-04-11  7:07     ` Aleksa Sarai
2020-04-11 10:51       ` Florian Weimer

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=20200411064530.GL23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
    --to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=cyphar@cyphar.com \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=safinaskar@mail.ru \
    /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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).