On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 04:16:22PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/base/devtmpfs.c b/drivers/base/devtmpfs.c
> index d2fb9c8ed205..e831c115daf9 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/devtmpfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/devtmpfs.c
> @@ -355,7 +355,7 @@ int devtmpfs_mount(const char *mntdir)
> if (!thread)
> return 0;
>
> - err = sys_mount("devtmpfs", (char *)mntdir, "devtmpfs", MS_SILENT, NULL);
> + err = sys_mount("devtmpfs", (char *)mntdir, "devtmpfs", SB_SILENT, NULL);
> if (err)
> printk(KERN_INFO "devtmpfs: error mounting %i\n", err);
> else
> @@ -381,7 +381,7 @@ static int devtmpfsd(void *p)
> *err = sys_unshare(CLONE_NEWNS);
> if (*err)
> goto out;
> - *err = sys_mount("devtmpfs", "/", "devtmpfs", MS_SILENT, options);
> + *err = sys_mount("devtmpfs", "/", "devtmpfs", SB_SILENT, options);
Er... These really should be MS_SILENT.
> @@ -311,14 +311,14 @@ static void get_dpms_capabilities(unsigned char flags,
> struct fb_monspecs *specs)
> {
> specs->dpms = 0;
> - if (flags & DPMS_ACTIVE_OFF)
> - specs->dpms |= FB_DPMS_ACTIVE_OFF;
> + if (flags & DPSB_ACTIVE_OFF)
> + specs->dpms |= FB_DPSB_ACTIVE_OFF;
... the hell?
> - if (sb->s_flags & MS_RDONLY)
> + if (sb->s_flags & SB_RDONLY)
TBH, it looks like something along the lines of sb_rdonly(sb) for the above would
make more sense.
> static int flags_to_propagation_type(int flags)
> {
> - int type = flags & ~(MS_REC | MS_SILENT);
> + int type = flags & ~(MS_REC | SB_SILENT);
Huh?
> - flags &= ~(MS_NOSUID | MS_NOEXEC | MS_NODEV | MS_ACTIVE | MS_BORN |
> - MS_NOATIME | MS_NODIRATIME | MS_RELATIME| MS_KERNMOUNT |
> - MS_STRICTATIME | MS_NOREMOTELOCK | MS_SUBMOUNT);
> + flags &= ~(MS_NOSUID | MS_NOEXEC | MS_NODEV | SB_ACTIVE | SB_BORN |
> + MS_NOATIME | MS_NODIRATIME | MS_RELATIME| SB_KERNMOUNT |
> + MS_STRICTATIME | SB_NOREMOTELOCK | SB_SUBMOUNT);
This is complete bullshit. _IF_ you want to separate these sets, do that
consistently. Mixing MS_... with SB_... in a mask is obviously wrong.
Sure, you can use the fact that such-and-such SB_ flag is the same value
as MS_... one; worth a BUILD_BUG_ON() somewhere to enforce that. However,
please separate the places where you have mount(2) flags argument from
those where you have a set of SB_... bits.
In this case you certainly have MS_... bunch. What's more, I would rather
do it as "we look only at..." instead of "we ignore the following..." - and
probably do it in do_...() functions instead. Note that they already
have parsing and validation of their own...
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
> index 517785052f1c..65489157f8d7 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
> @@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ static int read_mnt_flags(const char *path)
> }
> mnt_flags = 0;
> if (stat.f_flag & ST_RDONLY)
> - mnt_flags |= MS_RDONLY;
> + mnt_flags |= SB_RDONLY;
> if (stat.f_flag & ST_NOSUID)
> mnt_flags |= MS_NOSUID;
> if (stat.f_flag & ST_NODEV)
> @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ static int read_mnt_flags(const char *path)
> if (stat.f_flag & ST_RELATIME)
> mnt_flags |= MS_RELATIME;
> if (stat.f_flag & ST_SYNCHRONOUS)
> - mnt_flags |= MS_SYNCHRONOUS;
> + mnt_flags |= SB_SYNCHRONOUS;
> if (stat.f_flag & ST_MANDLOCK)
> mnt_flags |= ST_MANDLOCK;
Really? That's userland code, isn't it?
