From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qt0-f177.google.com ([209.85.216.177]:50224 "EHLO mail-qt0-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932075AbdJJNiX (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Oct 2017 09:38:23 -0400 Received: by mail-qt0-f177.google.com with SMTP id f15so51231359qtf.7 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 06:38:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171010095107.5lzkjibyrxbwfpvp@ws.net.home> References: <150730494491.6182.5139368907374172391.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <150730499269.6182.8121149524716523148.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20171010095107.5lzkjibyrxbwfpvp@ws.net.home> From: Miklos Szeredi Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 15:38:21 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/14] VFS: Implement fsmount() to effect a pre-configured mount [ver #6] To: Karel Zak Cc: David Howells , viro , linux-fsdevel , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, lkml , Jeff Layton Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 11:51 AM, Karel Zak wrote: > On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 10:00:01AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: >> > + >> > + if (flags & MS_RDONLY) >> > + mnt_flags |= MNT_READONLY; >> > + if (flags & MS_NOSUID) >> > + mnt_flags |= MNT_NOSUID; >> > + if (flags & MS_NODEV) >> > + mnt_flags |= MNT_NODEV; >> > + if (flags & MS_NOEXEC) >> > + mnt_flags |= MNT_NOEXEC; >> > + if (flags & MS_NODIRATIME) >> > + mnt_flags |= MNT_NODIRATIME; >> > + >> > + if (flags & MS_STRICTATIME) { >> > + if (flags & MS_NOATIME) >> > + return -EINVAL; >> > + } else if (flags & MS_NOATIME) { >> > + mnt_flags |= MNT_NOATIME; >> > + } else { >> > + mnt_flags |= MNT_RELATIME; >> > + } >> >> I'm not sure reusing the MS_FLAGS is the right choice. Why not export >> MNT_* to userspace? That would get us a clean namespace without >> confusion with sb flags and no need to convert back and forth. > > Well, if you think about it as about two separated things -- VFS-flags > and FS-flags (and for example /proc/#/mountinfo already uses two > columns for the flags) than the question is why the API uses one > variable? > > Would be better to use two variables everywhere? (mostly for the > syscall). > > It would be nice to keep for example propagation flags only in > vfs_flags, or use MS_RDONLY according to context (for FS or for VFS) > without extra MS_BIND, etc. MS_BIND will be gone in the new API. The two separate columns in /proc/#/mountinfo are going to be two separate things on the new interface (one is writes to the fsfd provided by fsopen(2), the other in flags for fsmount(2)). The question is how to call the mount flags (what you call vfs flags), "MS_RDONLY" or "MNT_RDONLY" on the uAPI. Either is probably fine, but I feel that "MNT_FOO" is better, because it's a relatively clean namespace concerned with mount flags and not polluted with all the scum that mount(2) collected. BTW, I think should be CC-d on all patches that concern the userspace API. Thanks, Miklos