On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 04:54:50PM -0600, Serge Hallyn wrote: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 10:34:49PM +0100, Christian Brauner wrote: > > Hey everyone, > > Hey Christian, > > a general request. Argue with me if it seems misguided. > > When looking at a patch or a small hunk of code, these days, if a variable > called 'ns' or 'user_ns' is seen passed to a function, it can be easy to > assume which user_ns it is based on what you think would make sense, but if > your assumption is wrong, your patch review will be wrong. > > Can we stick to a convention where we have maybe > > subj_userns - the userns of the task seeking some action > obj_userns - the userns of the thing being acted on - task, superblock,... > mnt_userns - the userns of a mountpoint through which an object is seen > > You're replacing a lot of such callers and callsites in this patchset, so > this would be a great time to start doing that. Hey Serge, this makes a lot of sense. I'll convert all accesses to the vfsmount's userns we're introducing in this series to to mnt_userns at least. Christian
