Re: [uml-devel] Re: [patch 03/12] uml: export getgid for hostfs

[Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>]

On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 08:05:26PM +0200, Blaisorblade wrote:
> > My unaswered reply to the first submission is at
> >
> > http://groups-beta.google.com/group/linux.kernel/messages/de9504fe5963ccd1,
> >0c05294c599b22b1,eab26a4ed3f8ff17?thread_id=16c905c7e28e7498&mode=thread&noh
> >eader=1&q=uml-export-getgid-for-hostfs#doc_eab26a4ed3f8ff17
> >
> > (sorry, couldn't find it on marc), it's been Cc'ed to the lists you sent
> > the patch to.
> Sorry, I wasn't clear... I read *that* answer, but it says "as mentioned in 
> the discussion about ROOT_DEV", and I couldn't find it.

That'd be:

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=110664428918937&w=2

> Also, I'd like to know whether there's a correct way to implement this (using 
> something different than root_dev, for instance the init[1] root directory 
> mount device). I understand that with the possibility for multiple mounts the 
> "root device" is more difficult to know (and maybe this is the reason for 
> which ROOT_DEV is bogus, is this?), but at least a check on the param 
> "rootfstype=hostfs" could be done.

personally I think it's a bad misfeature by itself.  If you absolutely
want it make it a mount option so it's explicit at least.

And yes, the only place where ROOT_DEV makes sense is in the early boot
process where the first filesystem in the first namespace is mounted, that's
why I want to get rid of the export to modules for it.

> Ok, this is nice. I'll repost the (updated) patch CC'ing Ingo Molnar (unless 
> there's another Ingo).

Yupp, mingo