On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 04:11:11PM +0400, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote: > 06.11.2012 16:06, J. Bruce Fields пишет: > >On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 02:14:50PM +0400, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote: > >>09.10.2012 23:35, J. Bruce Fields пишет: > >>>Cc'ing Eric since I seem to recall he suggested doing it this way? > >>> > >>>Seems OK to me, but maybe that swap_root should be in common code? (Or > >>>maybe we could use set_fs_root()?) > >>> > >> > >>This patch is not good since, as Eric mentioned, all kernel threads > >>share same fs struct. > >>We can swap whole fs struct. Or we can unshare fs struct > >>(unshare_fs_struct() is exported) and swap root in this case. > >>But this approach is to close to set_fs_root() logic, which is not > >>exported and seems there are some valid reasons for it. > > > >What are those reasons? > > > > I don't know them. > Trond told, that Al doesn't like the idea of set_fs_root() exporting. > > >Googling found one previous thread: > > > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1259986/focus=47687 > > > >There Trond requests an ACK from Al or Cristoph for the export, but I > >don't see either an ACK or any objection. > > > > Cristoph told me on LSF something line "No ... way", when I asked > him about set_fs_root() exporting. > But I had no opportunity to ask why. So, Al or Christoph: NFS calls up to rpcbind from the kernel using AF_LOCAL, so it looks up a path when it connects. We'd like to export set_fs_root() so we can temporarily put our task in the right namespace around the connect call. Is that reasonable? I just want to get a reason on record so we stop going in circles here. --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
