Re: What about adding AT_NO_AUTOMOUNT analogue to openat2?

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

 



On 2020-04-11, Askar Safin <safinaskar@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> What about adding stat's AT_NO_AUTOMOUNT analogue to openat2?

There isn't one. I did intend to add RESOLVE_NO_AUTOMOUNTS after openat2
was merged -- it's even mentioned in the commit message -- but I haven't
gotten around to it yet. The reason it wasn't added from the outset was
that I wasn't sure if adding it would be as simple as the other
RESOLVE_* flags.

Note that like all RESOLVE_* flags, it would apply to all components so
it wouldn't be truly analogous with AT_NO_AUTOMOUNT (though as I've
discussed at length on this ML, most people do actually want the
RESOLVE_* semantics). But you can emulate the AT_* ones much more easily
with RESOLVE_* than vice-versa).

-- 
Aleksa Sarai
Senior Software Engineer (Containers)
SUSE Linux GmbH
<https://www.cyphar.com/>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[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