On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 10:58:26AM -0800, Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 18:44 +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Just FYI: Al was very opposed to the idea of passing the vfsmount to > > the vfs_ helpers, so you should discuss this with him. > > > > Looking at the actual patches I see you're lazy in a lot of places. > > Please make sure that when you introduce a vfsmount argument somewhere > > that it is _always_ passed and not just when it's conveniant. Yes, that's > > more work, but then again if you're not consistant anyone half-serious > > will laught at a security model using this infrasturcture. > > nfsd in particular tends to be a bit lazy about passing around vfsmount > info. Forcing it to do so should not be hard since the vfsmount is > already cached in the "struct export" (which can be found using the > filehandle). It will take a bit of re-engineering in order to pass that > information around inside the nfsd code, though. I actually have a patch to fix that. It's part of a bigger series that's not quite ready, but I hope to finish all of it this month. > Note also that it might be nice to enforce the vfsmount argument by > replacing the existing dentry parameters with a struct path instead of > adding an extra reference to the vfsmount to existing functions. That definitly sounds like a good idea, independent of whether we want to pass the vfsmount in more places or not. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
