[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <E1IG84S-00064z-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 08:52:36 +0200
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: kzak@...hat.com
CC: chuck.lever@...cle.com, miklos@...redi.hu,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
sfrench@...ba.org, trond.myklebust@....uio.no,
mark.fasheh@...cle.com, kurt.hackel@...cle.com
Subject: Re: request for patches: showing mount options
> > The removal of /etc/mtab in favor of /proc/mounts is a new requirement,
> > and is not as trivial as you might hope. Internally the NFS client
> > represents the mount options as a binary data structure, and it contains
> > only the information that has traditionally been passed into the kernel
> > by the current mount command. The user-space-only options are not
> > passed to the kernel nor stored in the data structure.
> >
> > Adding facilities to store information about every possible mount
> > option, including the user-space-only ones, will take a bit of time, but
> > is possible, if not straightforward. We just have to understand all the
> > dependencies.
>
> I still have doubts. The removal of /etc/mtab is nice, but a little
> unreal wish. Do we really want to store non-kernel data (options) in
> kernel? What about options that are not closely related to any
> filesystem -- for example "loop="?
"loop=DEV" is special, we've already talked about that.
For example if we have an mtab entry like this:
/dir/foo.iso /mnt/image ext3 rw,loop=/dev/loop/0 0 0
It says: /dev/loop/0 has been automatically set up by mount(8) from
/dir/foo.iso and so needs to be torn down by umount(8). It is not a
property of the mount, rather the property of the device.
So what we really want is a file to store this, and only this info:
/var/lib/mount/loop:
/dev/loop/0 /dir/foo.iso
/dev/loop/2 /dir/bar.img
...
Notice, there's nothing about the _mountpoint_ in this file.
> Maybe we can replace /etc/mtab with something more useful
> (e.g. /var/run/mount/<mntid>.tab) for really user-space-only information.
The problem with storing mount options in userspace is that
unprivileged mounts/umounts won't work in the presense of those, we
cannot _force_ an unprivileged user to update a file.
So we want to avoid storing options in userspace as long as possible.
Miklos
-
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