As far as I know, shared subtrees in recursive bind mounts are a misfeature that existed for the sole purpose of allowing recursive binds + chroot to emulate mount namespaces. But we have mount namespaces, so what are they for? They're totally fsked up. For example, don't try this on a live system: # mount --make-rshared / # mount --rbind / /mnt # umount -l /mnt It will unmount *everything*. On Fedora, you don't even need the --make-rshared part. WTF? Can we just remove the feature entirely in linux-next and see if anyone complains? I'm all for propagation across mount namespaces, but I suspect that, at the very least, there is no legitimate reason whatsoever for mounts to propagate from a recursive bind mount back to the origin. IOW, can we kill shared mounts and just keep private and slave mounts? --Andy -- Andy Lutomirski AMA Capital Management, LLC -- 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
