Re: [PATCH 03/14] VFS: Implement a filesystem superblock creation/configuration context [ver #6]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Yes I did mean vfs_parse_sb_flag_option().
> 
> Yes, I understand its purpose, but it would be cleaner if all the
> option parsing was done in fc->ops->parse_option().
> 
> It might be worth introducing the vfs_parse_sb_flag_option(), to be
> called from ->parse_option().

I was trying to relieve the filesystem of the requirement to have to deal with
common stuff and also the need to talk directly to the LSM.

> > Btw, how would it affect the LSM?
> 
> LSM would have to reject a "reset" if not enough privileges to
> *create* a new fs instance, since it essentially requires creating a
> new config, which is what is done when creating an fs instance.

That's not what I'm asking.  Would the reset change LSM state?  Reset security
labels and options?

> > Sorry, how does the new, clean one do it without handling these options?
> > There is no MS_* mask passed in, except to fsmount().
> 
> The new one certainly should.

Should what?

> Ignoring unknown flags/options is generally a bad idea.

They're not unknown - just not of interest to the filesystem.

David



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux