* query about create_mnt_ns
@ 2013-02-11 12:14 Rajat Sharma
2013-02-11 14:10 ` Al Viro
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Rajat Sharma @ 2013-02-11 12:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel-mail
Hi,
I was looking at implementation of init_mount_tree() function and
found a discrepancy in list manipulation of mnt_namsespace and
vfsmount across kernel version 2.6.30. Up till kernel version
2.6.30.x, vfsmount structure was added to the list headed by
mnt_namespace structure just allocated:
list_add(&mnt->mnt_list, &ns->list);
Beyond that with the introduction of function create_mnt_ns(), it does
reverse of previous behavior:
list_add(&new_ns->list, &mnt->mnt_list);
i.e. it is adding new mnt_namespace to the vfsmount list. Is this the
expected behavior? i.e. do we want to maintain list of namespaces per
mount? Please let me know if I am missing something here.
-Rajat
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: query about create_mnt_ns
2013-02-11 12:14 query about create_mnt_ns Rajat Sharma
@ 2013-02-11 14:10 ` Al Viro
2013-02-11 14:53 ` Rajat Sharma
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Al Viro @ 2013-02-11 14:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rajat Sharma; +Cc: linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel-mail
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 05:44:29PM +0530, Rajat Sharma wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was looking at implementation of init_mount_tree() function and
> found a discrepancy in list manipulation of mnt_namsespace and
> vfsmount across kernel version 2.6.30. Up till kernel version
> 2.6.30.x, vfsmount structure was added to the list headed by
> mnt_namespace structure just allocated:
>
> list_add(&mnt->mnt_list, &ns->list);
>
> Beyond that with the introduction of function create_mnt_ns(), it does
> reverse of previous behavior:
>
> list_add(&new_ns->list, &mnt->mnt_list);
>
> i.e. it is adding new mnt_namespace to the vfsmount list. Is this the
> expected behavior? i.e. do we want to maintain list of namespaces per
> mount? Please let me know if I am missing something here.
The fact that if A and B are both empty, list_add(A, B) and list_add(B, A)
will do exactly the same thing ;-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: query about create_mnt_ns
2013-02-11 14:10 ` Al Viro
@ 2013-02-11 14:53 ` Rajat Sharma
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Rajat Sharma @ 2013-02-11 14:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Al Viro; +Cc: linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel-mail
Thanks :)
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 05:44:29PM +0530, Rajat Sharma wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was looking at implementation of init_mount_tree() function and
>> found a discrepancy in list manipulation of mnt_namsespace and
>> vfsmount across kernel version 2.6.30. Up till kernel version
>> 2.6.30.x, vfsmount structure was added to the list headed by
>> mnt_namespace structure just allocated:
>>
>> list_add(&mnt->mnt_list, &ns->list);
>>
>> Beyond that with the introduction of function create_mnt_ns(), it does
>> reverse of previous behavior:
>>
>> list_add(&new_ns->list, &mnt->mnt_list);
>>
>> i.e. it is adding new mnt_namespace to the vfsmount list. Is this the
>> expected behavior? i.e. do we want to maintain list of namespaces per
>> mount? Please let me know if I am missing something here.
>
> The fact that if A and B are both empty, list_add(A, B) and list_add(B, A)
> will do exactly the same thing ;-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-02-11 14:53 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-02-11 12:14 query about create_mnt_ns Rajat Sharma
2013-02-11 14:10 ` Al Viro
2013-02-11 14:53 ` Rajat Sharma
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).