On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 09:29:39AM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> On May 14 2007 15:11, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> >
> >TODO: bind and move mounts aren't yet supported with union mounts.
>
> Are the semantics already set?
Not yet.
>
> >@@ -294,6 +294,10 @@ static struct vfsmount *clone_mnt(struct
> > if (!mnt)
> > goto alloc_failed;
> >
> >+ /*
> >+ * As of now, cloning of union mounted mnt isn't permitted.
> >+ */
> >+ BUG_ON(mnt->mnt_flags & MNT_UNION);
>
> One, please avoid BUG_ONs. Now I am not sure if clone_mnt is called
> as part of kthread creation when CLONE_FS is it. If so, get rid of
> this one real fast. Also see chunk "@@ -1031,.. @@ do_loopback"
> below.
Looks like not CLONE_FS but CLONE_NEWNS ends up calling clone_mnt.
>
> if(mnt->mnt_flags & MNT_UNION)
> goto return_einval;
>
> or something.
Will do this for now, but eventually we need to get this working sanely anyway.
>
> >+#ifdef CONFIG_UNION_MOUNT
> >+ struct union_info *uinfo = NULL;
> >+#endif
> >
> > retval = security_sb_umount(mnt, flags);
> > if (retval)
> >@@ -685,6 +696,14 @@ static int do_umount(struct vfsmount *mn
> > }
> >
> > down_write(&namespace_sem);
> >+#ifdef CONFIG_UNION_MOUNT
> >+ /*
> >+ * Grab a reference to the union_info which gets detached
> >+ * from the dentries in release_mounts().
> >+ */
> >+ if (mnt->mnt_flags & MNT_UNION)
> >+ uinfo = union_lock_and_get(mnt->mnt_root);
> >+#endif
> > spin_lock(&vfsmount_lock);
> > event++;
> >
> >@@ -699,6 +718,15 @@ static int do_umount(struct vfsmount *mn
> > security_sb_umount_busy(mnt);
> > up_write(&namespace_sem);
> > release_mounts(&umount_list);
> >+#ifdef CONFIG_UNION_MOUNT
> >+ if (uinfo) {
> >+ if (atomic_read(&uinfo->u_count) == 1)
> >+ /* We are the last user of this union_info */
> >+ union_release(uinfo);
> >+ else
> >+ union_put_and_unlock(uinfo);
> >+ }
> >+#endif
> > return retval;
> > }
> >
>
> Is it feasible to do with with some less #if/#endif magic?:
>
Will try. We need union_info here which is available only with
CONFIG_UNION_MOUNT.
> >@@ -1031,6 +1070,15 @@ static int do_loopback(struct nameidata
> > if (err)
> > return err;
> >
> >+ /*
> >+ * bind mounting to or from union mounts is not supported
> >+ */
> >+ err = -EINVAL;
> >+ if (nd->mnt->mnt_flags & MNT_UNION)
> >+ goto out_unlocked;
> >+ if (old_nd.mnt->mnt_flags & MNT_UNION)
> >+ goto out_unlocked;
> >+
>
> Do the same in clone_mnt.
>
> > down_write(&namespace_sem);
> > err = -EINVAL;
> > if (IS_MNT_UNBINDABLE(old_nd.mnt))
> >@@ -1064,6 +1112,7 @@ static int do_loopback(struct nameidata
> >
> > out:
> > up_write(&namespace_sem);
> >+out_unlocked:
> > path_release(&old_nd);
> > return err;
> > }
>
> >+++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> >@@ -1984,6 +1984,9 @@ static inline ino_t parent_ino(struct de
> > /* kernel/fork.c */
> > extern int unshare_files(void);
> >
> >+/* fs/union.c */
> >+#include <linux/union.h>
> >+
> > /* Transaction based IO helpers */
> >
> > /*
>
> This raises a big eyebrow. If linux/fs.h can compile without the
> inclusion of linux/union.h, do not put linux/union.h in fs.h.
>
Ok, better to include union.h in the appropriate .c file which needs it.
> >+#ifdef CONFIG_UNION_MOUNT
> >+
> >+#include <linux/fs_struct.h>
> >+
> >+/* namespace stuff used at mount time */
> >+extern void attach_mnt_union(struct vfsmount *, struct nameidata *);
> >+extern void detach_mnt_union(struct vfsmount *, struct path *);
>
> You do not need that #include I suppose. Just predeclare the structs.
>
> struct path;
> struct vfsmount;
> extern void ...
>
> Saves us the "compiler slurps in so many .h files" problem.
Sure. And thanks for the review.
Regards,
Bharata.
-
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
