From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751370AbeFDPwN (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jun 2018 11:52:13 -0400 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:35772 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750723AbeFDPwL (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jun 2018 11:52:11 -0400 Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 16:52:05 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Miklos Szeredi Cc: David Howells , Christoph Hellwig , linux-fsdevel , linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, LKML , Linux API Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] open_tree(2) (was Re: [PATCH 30/32] vfs: Allow cloning of a mount tree with open(O_PATH|O_CLONE_MOUNT) [ver #8]) Message-ID: <20180604155205.GH30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <152720672288.9073.9868393448836301272.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <152720691829.9073.10564431140980997005.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20180601062654.GA32397@infradead.org> <7067.1527841663@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20180602030913.GU30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20180602034255.GV30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <21804.1527954321@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20180602174957.GX30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20180603005532.GZ30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 12:34:44PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > fsopen = create fsfd > fsmount = fsfd -> mountfd & set attr on mountfd & attach mountfd > fspick = path -> fsfd > move_mount = attach mountfd or move existing > fsinfo = info from path > open_tree = new mountfd from path or clone > mount_setattr = set attr on mountfd > > Notice that fsmount() encompasses mount_setattr() + move_mount() > functionality. Split those out and leave fsmount() to actually do > the "fsfd ->mountfd" translation? Might make sense. > fsinfo() name suggests it's in the same class as > fsopen/fsmount/fspick, operating on fsfd object, but's it's not and I > think that's slightly confusing. > > Rename move_mount() -> mount_move()? mount_move_bikeshed_bikeshed_bikeshed(), surely? > Also does it make sense to make the cloning behavior of open_tree() > optional? Without cloning it's just a plain open(O_PATH). That way > it could be renamed mount_clone(). Umm... I'm not sure about that one. If nothing else, OPEN_TREE_DETACH might be a good idea, in which case cloning is not the primary effect; hell knows.