Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > So you could bloody well just leave recognition (and handling) of "source" > > to the caller, leaving you with just this: > > > > if (strcmp(param->key, "source") == 0) > > return -ENOPARAM; > > /* Just log an error for backwards compatibility */ > > errorf(fc, "%s: Unknown parameter '%s'", fc->fs_type->name, param->key); > > return 0; > > Which is fine for the old mount(2) interface. > > But we have a brand new API as well; do we really need to carry these > backward compatibility issues forward? I mean checking if a > param/flag is supported or not *is* useful and lacking that check is > the source of numerous headaches in legacy interfaces (just take the > open(2) example and the introduction of O_TMPFILE). The problem with what you're suggesting is that you can't then make /sbin/mount to use the new syscalls because that would change userspace behaviour - unless you either teach /sbin/mount which filesystems discard which errors from unrecognised options or pass a flag to the kernel to shift into or out of 'strict' mode. David
