From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752676AbaHMNSl (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Aug 2014 09:18:41 -0400 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:44966 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751145AbaHMNSj (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Aug 2014 09:18:39 -0400 Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 14:18:31 +0100 From: Al Viro To: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: Linus Torvalds , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Linux-Fsdevel , Kernel Mailing List , Andy Lutomirski , Rob Landley , Miklos Szeredi , Christoph Hellwig , Karel Zak , "J. Bruce Fields" , Fengguang Wu , tytso@mit.edu Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Detaching mounts on unlink for 3.15 Message-ID: <20140813131831.GY18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <87y4z8uzqw.fsf_-_@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87ppkhc4pp.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87ha5r3emw.fsf_-_@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <20140417202237.GA18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <87tx9rwsz4.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <20140417221203.GC18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20140420054108.GQ18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20140511164530.GB18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20140809093412.GA23108@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <87ha1ic8rd.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87ha1ic8rd.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 03:17:10AM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > I have rebased my changes against vfs.git#for-eric and my changes work > just fine on top of the base you have built. The changes are avaiable > in user-namespace.git#vfs-detach-mounts10 so you just be able to just > pull the changes in. > > Reading your pile #1 pull request to Linus it sounds like you are > planning to suck all of this into the vfs tree. I am. Questions: * is there any reason why we need list instead of hlist for per-mountpoint list of mounts? Looks like hlist would do just as well, and it's a bit less noise * __d_unalias() change looks rather odd. What we do there is _not_ "avoid leaking mounts", it's "don't get a bunch of existing mounts suddenly relocate". What's up with that one?