From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] shared mounts: save mount flag space Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 06:32:16 +0000 Message-ID: <20051127063216.GC27946@ftp.linux.org.uk> References: <20051126215509.073cb957.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Miklos Szeredi , linuxram@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: To: Andrew Morton Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051126215509.073cb957.akpm@osdl.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 09:55:09PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > - else if (flags & (MS_SHARED | MS_PRIVATE | MS_SLAVE | MS_UNBINDABLE)) > > - retval = do_change_type(&nd, flags); > > + else if (flags & MS_PROPAGATION) > > + retval = do_change_type(&nd, flags & MS_REC, data_page); > > else if (flags & MS_MOVE) > > retval = do_move_mount(&nd, dev_name); > > else > > But I don't know how much trauma this would cause. Hasn't util-linux > already been patched with the new mount flags? > > If it has, and if it uses the same names for these options, the patched > mount(8) just won't work. > > The proposed new mount options should be documented somewhere. > > Anyway, I'll let Ram&Al decide on this proposal. It's a) palliative b) ugly Let's face it, mount(2) ABI is getting past its shelf life already. We'll need saner replacement (not mixing action with the flags and being really typed) anyway, so let's not introduce more kludges into mount(2) already messy situation - it's not worth the effort.