[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <467B7F6F.4030007@zytor.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 00:51:11 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Ram Pai <linuxram@...ibm.com>
CC: Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, util-linux-ng@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Adding subroot information to /proc/mounts, or obtaining that
through other means
Ram Pai wrote:
>
> Ok. so you think /proc/mounts can be extended easily without breaking
> any userspace commands?
>
> well lets see..
> 1. to disambiguate bind mounts, we have to add a field that displays the
> path to the mount's root dentry from the filesystem's root
> dentry. Agree?
>
> 2. For filesystems that do not have a backing store, it becomes hard
> to disambiguate bind mounts in (1). So we need to add a
> filesystem-id field.
>
> 3. if we need to add the propagation status of the mount we need a
> propagation flag added in the output.
>
> 4. To be able to construct the propagation tree, we need a way to refer
> to the other mounts, since some mounts are peers and some other
> mounts are master. Which means we need a mount-id field.
> Agree?
>
> If you agree to the above 4 new fields, it becomes challenging to
> extend /proc/mounts to incorporate these new fields without
> breaking any existing applications.
>
No, I don't think so. I suspect, in fact, that as long as we add the
new fields to the right (obviously) we should be fine. There aren't all
that many users of /proc/mounts, and even fewer that don't use the
library functions (getmntent et al.)
-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists