On Sat, May 08, 2021 at 11:15:28PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sat, May 08, 2021 at 10:46:23PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Sat, May 08, 2021 at 03:17:44PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 2:06 PM Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, May 08, 2021 at 01:39:45PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +static inline int prepend_entries(struct prepend_buffer *b, const struct path *path, const struct path *root, struct mount *mnt)
> > > >
> > > > If anything, s/path/dentry/, since vfsmnt here will be equal to &mnt->mnt all along.
> > >
> > > Too subtle for me.
> > >
> > > And is it? Because mnt is from
> > >
> > > mnt = real_mount(path->mnt);
> > >
> > > earlier, while vfsmount is plain "path->mnt".
> >
> > static inline struct mount *real_mount(struct vfsmount *mnt)
> > {
> > return container_of(mnt, struct mount, mnt);
> > }
>
> Basically, struct vfsmount instances are always embedded into struct mount ones.
> All information about the mount tree is in the latter (and is visible only if
> you manage to include fs/mount.h); here we want to walk towards root, so...
>
> Rationale: a lot places use struct vfsmount pointers, but they've no need to
> access all that stuff. So struct vfsmount got trimmed down, with most of the
> things that used to be there migrating into the containing structure.
>
> [Christian Browner Cc'd]
> BTW, WTF do we have struct mount.user_ns and struct vfsmount.mnt_userns?
> Can they ever be different? Christian?
Yes, they can.
>
> Sigh... Namespace flavours always remind me of old joke -
> Highlander II: There Should've Been Only One...
(I'd prefer if mount propagation would die first.)
