From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Miklos Szeredi Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with the overlayfs tree Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 15:38:05 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20180619112140.58be35dd@canb.auug.org.au> <22145.1529397638@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <22145.1529397638@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: David Howells Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Al Viro , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 10:40 AM, David Howells wrote: > Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >> /* These sb flags are internal to the kernel */ >> #define MS_SUBMOUNT (1<<26) >> -#define MS_NOREMOTELOCK (1<<27) >> #define MS_NOSEC (1<<28) >> #define MS_BORN (1<<29) >> #define MS_ACTIVE (1<<30) > > Ummm... Can MS_NOREMOTELOCK be removed? I know it's listed in the internal > flags section, but all of these have been exposed to userspace for over a > year. Ideally, I'd remove all of these from UAPI, but can anyone guarantee > that no pieces of userspace refer to them? The number of potential users of these flags is pretty low, so I think we can try and remove them and hope nothing breaks. Probably best left after the dust settles. Thanks, Miklos