Karel Zak wrote:
>
> Yeah. How about include propagation trees to this file?
>
> mountpoint + ID + relative path + type + options + propagation-flag +
> {peer,master}-mount-id
>
> / 0xa917800 / ext3 rw PRIVATE
> /mnt 0xa917100 / ext3 rw SHARED peer:0xa917100
> /tmp 0xa917f00 /1 ext3 rw SLAVE master:0xa917100
>
I think we're talking about a different meaning of "id" here... you seem
to be talking about the vfsmount pointer, whereas it was originally
proposed as mnt_sb->sb_dev. Both are useful, for different reasons of
course.
We should include mnt_devname as well.
People are a bit nervous about exposing kernel pointers in userspace, I
have noticed; would it be better to add a "mnt_id" field to struct
vfsmount; this can simply be a counter assigned when the structure is
assigned and then never changed (it might have to be a 64-bit counter,
but I don't think that adding 8 bytes to struct vfsmount should be a
huge deal.)
Does that service everyone's needs?
-hpa
-
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
