Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Yes I did mean vfs_parse_sb_flag_option(). > > Yes, I understand its purpose, but it would be cleaner if all the > option parsing was done in fc->ops->parse_option(). > > It might be worth introducing the vfs_parse_sb_flag_option(), to be > called from ->parse_option(). I was trying to relieve the filesystem of the requirement to have to deal with common stuff and also the need to talk directly to the LSM. > > Btw, how would it affect the LSM? > > LSM would have to reject a "reset" if not enough privileges to > *create* a new fs instance, since it essentially requires creating a > new config, which is what is done when creating an fs instance. That's not what I'm asking. Would the reset change LSM state? Reset security labels and options? > > Sorry, how does the new, clean one do it without handling these options? > > There is no MS_* mask passed in, except to fsmount(). > > The new one certainly should. Should what? > Ignoring unknown flags/options is generally a bad idea. They're not unknown - just not of interest to the filesystem. David -- 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
