Re: [PATCH 12/12] vfs: don't parse "silent" option

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

 



On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 05:16:58AM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 5:12 AM Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 4:37 AM Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 04:59:40PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > > While this is a standard option as documented in mount(8), it is ignored by
> > > > most filesystems.  So reject, unless filesystem explicitly wants to handle
> > > > it.
> > > >
> > > > The exception is unconverted filesystems, where it is unknown if the
> > > > filesystem handles this or not.
> > > >
> > > > Any implementation, such as mount(8), that needs to parse this option
> > > > without failing can simply ignore the return value from fsconfig().
> > >
> > > Unless I'm missing something, that will mean that having it in /etc/fstab
> > > for a converted filesystem (xfs, for example) will fail when booting
> > > new kernel with existing /sbin/mount.  Doesn't sound like a good idea...
> >
> > Nope, the mount(2) case is not changed (see second hunk).
> 
> Wrong, this has nothing to do with mount(2).  The second hunk is about
> unconverted filesystems...
> 
> When a filesystem that really needs to handle "silent" is converted,
> it can handle that option itself.

You know, I had a specific reason to mention XFS...



[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