On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 06:20:24PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 07:15:05PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 11:44:09PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> > > Provide an fsopen() system call that starts the process of preparing to
> > > create a superblock that will then be mountable, using an fd as a context
> > > handle. fsopen() is given the name of the filesystem that will be used:
> > >
> > > int mfd = fsopen(const char *fsname, unsigned int flags);
> > >
> > > where flags can be 0 or FSOPEN_CLOEXEC.
> > >
> > > For example:
> > >
> > > sfd = fsopen("ext4", FSOPEN_CLOEXEC);
> > > write(sfd, "s /dev/sdb1"); // note I'm ignoring write's length arg
> > > write(sfd, "o noatime");
> > > write(sfd, "o acl");
> > > write(sfd, "o user_attr");
> > > write(sfd, "o iversion");
> > > write(sfd, "o ");
> > > write(sfd, "r /my/container"); // root inside the fs
> > > write(sfd, "x create"); // create the superblock
> >
> > Ugh, creating configfs again in a syscall form? I know people love
> > file descriptors, but can't you do this with a configfs entry instead if
> > you really want to do this type of thing from userspace in this type of
> > "style"?
> >
> > Why reinvent the wheel again?
>
> The damn thing REALLY, REALLY depends upon the fs type. How would
> you map it on configfs?
/sys/kernel/config/fs/ext4/ would work, right? Each fs "type" would be
listed there.
Anyway, the whole "write a bunch of options and then do a 'create'" is
exactly the way configfs works. Why not use that?
thanks,
greg k-h
--
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
