From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030405AbXDQOdS (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Apr 2007 10:33:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030413AbXDQOdS (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Apr 2007 10:33:18 -0400 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.149]:33702 "EHLO e31.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030370AbXDQOdQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Apr 2007 10:33:16 -0400 Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 09:33:01 -0500 From: "Serge E. Hallyn" To: Miklos Szeredi Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, viro@ftp.linux.org.uk, linuxram@us.ibm.com, ebiederm@xmission.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.osdl.org Subject: Re: [patch 05/10] Add "permit user submounts" flag to vfsmount Message-ID: <20070417143301.GH1442@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> References: <20070416110308.739051445@szeredi.hu> <20070416110414.591968270@szeredi.hu> <20070416192050.GB30435@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Quoting Miklos Szeredi (miklos@szeredi.hu): > > > From: Miklos Szeredi > > > > > > If MNT_USERMNT flag is not set in the target vfsmount, then > > > > MNT_USER and MNT_USERMNT? I claim no way will people keep those > > straight. How about MNT_ALLOWUSER and MNT_USER? > > Umm, is "allowuser" more clear than "usermnt"? What is allowed to the I think so, yes. One makes it clear that we're talking about allowing user (somethings :), one might just as well mean "this is a user mount." > user? "allowusermnt" may be more descriptive, but it's a bit too > long. Yes, if it weren't too long it would by far have been my preference. Maybe despite the length we should still go with it... > I don't think it matters all that much, the user will have to look up > the semantics in the manpage anyway. Is "nosuid" descriptive? Not > very much, but we got used to it. nosuid is quite clear. MNT_USER and MNT_USERMNT are so confusing that in the time I go from quitting the manpage to foregrounding my editor, I may have already forgotten which was which. -serge