[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46C00446.7030703@openvz.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 11:12:06 +0400
From: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
CC: akpm@...l.org, devel@...nvz.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
containers@...ts.osdl.org, oleg@...sign.ru, sukadev@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/20] Introduce MS_KERNMOUNT flag
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 03:47:55PM +0400, xemul@...nvz.org wrote:
>> This flag tells the .get_sb callback that this is a kern_mount() call
>> so that it can trust *data pointer to be valid in-kernel one. If this
>> flag is passed from the user process, it is cleared since the *data
>> pointer is not a valid kernel object.
>>
>> Running a few steps forward - this will be needed for proc to create the
>> superblock and store a valid pid namespace on it during the namespace
>> creation. The reason, why the namespace cannot live without proc mount
>> is described in the appropriate patch.
>
> I don't like this at all. We should never pass kernel and userspace
> addresses through the same pointer. Maybe add an additional argument
> to the get_sb prototype instead. But this whole idea of mounting /proc
> from kernelspace sounds like a really bad idea to me. /proc should
> never be mounted from the kernel but always normally from userspace.
Why then is it mounted in proc_root_init()?
Thanks,
Pavel
-
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