Re: [PATCH v5 40/42] fs: introduce MOUNT_ATTR_IDMAP

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

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 40/42] fs: introduce MOUNT_ATTR_IDMAP
From: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 12:43:57 +0100
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, John Johansen <john.johansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxx>, Mimi Zohar <zohar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@xxxxxxxxx>, Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@xxxxxxxxx>, Casey Schaufler <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>, Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@xxxxxxxxx>, OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Geoffrey Thomas <geofft@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Mrunal Patel <mpatel@xxxxxxxxxx>, Josh Triplett <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx>, Theodore Tso <tytso@xxxxxxx>, Alban Crequy <alban@xxxxxxxxxx>, Tycho Andersen <tycho@xxxxxxxx>, David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx>, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, St??phane Graber <stgraber@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@xxxxxxxxxx>, Lennart Poettering <lennart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, smbarber@xxxxxxxxxxxx, Phil Estes <estesp@xxxxxxxxx>, Serge Hallyn <serge@xxxxxxxxxx>, Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Todd Kjos <tkjos@xxxxxxxxxx>, Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>, containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-security-module@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-integrity@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>, Mauricio V??squez Bernal <mauricio@xxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20210119094750.GQ3364550@infradead.org>

On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 09:47:50AM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Generally looks good, but wouldn't it make sense to introduce the
> userns_fd in version 0 of the mount_attr structure instead of having
> two versions from the start?

I agree.

References:
- [PATCH v5 00/42] idmapped mounts
  - From: Christian Brauner
- [PATCH v5 40/42] fs: introduce MOUNT_ATTR_IDMAP
  - From: Christian Brauner
- Re: [PATCH v5 40/42] fs: introduce MOUNT_ATTR_IDMAP
  - From: Christoph Hellwig

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH RESEND V11 0/7] fuse: Add support for passthrough read/write
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH v4] overlay: Implement volatile-specific fsync error behaviour
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH v5 40/42] fs: introduce MOUNT_ATTR_IDMAP
Next by thread: [PATCH v5 24/42] af_unix: handle idmapped mounts
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[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]