From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: btrfs multiple mounts stacked on the same mount point
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 13:17:34 +0000 (UTC) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <pan$2e9dc$83411375$89da7090$541a6478@cox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 52FB2490.1030207@oracle.com
Anand Jain posted on Wed, 12 Feb 2014 15:36:48 +0800 as excerpted:
>> BTW, another (general) reason over-mounts are sometimes used is to
>> deliberately obscure what's underneath. It's worth noting that
>> anything with a file already open on the underlying filesystem still
>> has access to that file after something else is mounted over top, and
>> that fact is sometimes used to control access to certain
>> files/filesystems, by starting whatever it is that needs to access them
>> and letting them open the files they need, then over-mounting a
>> different filesystem, often empty, so no other applications can access
>> the under-mounted files.
>
> Thanks. Makes sense theoretically. Any eg of real practical
> application ? Any product in the market using it that way ?
At least from here over-mount-to-prevent-access seems more like an admin
technique than something someone would ship in a product. And yes, while
I don't know of any specific product using the technique, I've certainly
read of admins using the trick -- that's actually how I knew about it
myself.
> looks btrfs-progs shouldn't depend on the mnt-point driven ioctls to
> manage the FS. Now that's a set of challenges.
I don't really see why not. Why would one /need/ to issue ioctls to an
under-mounted filesystem that's not otherwise accessible (except to apps
with files on it opened before a different filesystem was over-mounted on
top), and why wouldn't the ordinary rules of umounting the over-mount in
ordered to access it if necessary, not apply? In general, I think most
admins are used to the general limitation, and I doubt it would even
occur to most of them to try to (for example) run a balance or check the
free space on a filesystem they can't otherwise access, because that sort
of thing is in most cases simply not possible.
And if for some reason one were to need such an arrangement, that's what
bind/move/shared-mounts are for. (See the mount (8) manpage and $KERNDIR/
Documentation/filesystems/sharedsubtree.txt.)
--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-12 13:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-11 8:18 btrfs multiple mounts stacked on the same mount point Anand Jain
2014-02-11 20:57 ` Duncan
2014-02-12 3:37 ` Anand Jain
2014-02-12 5:15 ` Duncan
2014-02-12 7:36 ` Anand Jain
2014-02-12 13:17 ` Duncan [this message]
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='pan$2e9dc$83411375$89da7090$541a6478@cox.net' \
--to=1i5t5.duncan@cox.net \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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).