On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 04:52:05PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > 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. FWIW, to make it clear: fsmount(2) in this series actually does *NOT* attach it to the tree. Commit message definitely needs updating - as it is, it's +SYSCALL_DEFINE5(fsmount, int, fs_fd, unsigned int, flags, unsigned int, ms_flags, + void *, reserved4, void *, reserved5) PS: IMO these reserved... arguments are in bad taste; if anyone has good reasons for that practice in ABI design, I'd like to hear those. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
