> On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 12:47:59PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > So what should I do? > > > > Would Al be wanting to merge this into his VFS tree? (Can't find it > > on git.kernel.org yet, BTW.) > > FWIW, it's on hera right now, should propagate to git.kernel.org in a few. > > Branches I'd pushed there: vfs-fixes.b0 and ro-bind.b0. The latter is > on top of the former. There will be more, but that at least takes care > of the most urgent stuff. Again, apologies for things being too damn > slow ;-/ > > As for the unprivileged mounts... > a) why do we lose them on clone() in new namespace? Bloody > inconvenient, to put it mildly. > b) why do we prohibit all kinds of remount? I wanted to get the basics right, before thinking about these details. But getting the semantics of a) right before this is merged is a good idea, of course... So I'll have to think about that. The remount stuff can wait (especially if there will be a new mount API for this kind of thing). > c) just what is limited by that sysctl? AFAICS, rbind is allowed > if mountpoint is on user vfsmount and it seems to create vfsmounts without > eating into that limit just fine... What's the point of limiting the > amount of vfsmounts marked user when you do not limit the number of vfsmount > one can allocate? The limit is there, so that unprivileged users cannot create insane number of mounts. It's just a safety thing, analogous to /proc/sys/fs/file-max. Thanks for looking at this. Miklos - 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
