From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:45936 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934420AbdEKOar (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 May 2017 10:30:47 -0400 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: References: <149443309780.2378.6532276992468576087.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <149443316786.2378.6065648057770350840.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> To: Sargun Dhillon Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, mszeredi@redhat.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, jlayton@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/14] Implement fsopen() to prepare for a mount MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 11 May 2017 15:30:34 +0100 Message-ID: <6167.1494513034@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Sargun Dhillon wrote: > Instead of string based configuration, does it perhaps make sense to > pass in structured mount data? Something like: I don't think it helps particularly. > enum mount_command_id { > MOUNT_OPTION_STR, > MOUNT_SET_USER_NS > }; > > struct mount_attr { > __u64 command_id; > union { > char option_str[4095]; > char mount_source[PATH_MAX]; Why limit the option size to 4096? I can see situations where it might be necessary to hand in a bigger blob - giving cifs a Microsoft Kerberos PAC for example. > struct { > __u32 user_ns_fd There are more than just that namespace that could be relevant. > } > } > } > > It seems a lot less error prone to me. Not really. The only real difference is how one selects what action is intended and how one determines the length. write() has a length parameter. David