All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Tim Hockin <thockin@hockin.org>
Cc: autofs <autofs@linux.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [autofs] [RFC] Towards a Modern Autofs
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 14:20:57 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3FFB34C9.5010305@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040106221502.GA7398@hockin.org>

Tim Hockin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 02:06:34PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> 
>>>Can you maybe share some details?  I think this deign moves MORE state to
>>>userspace (expiry aside).  The "state" in kernel is really mostly sent back
>>>to userspace.  No more passing pipes into the kernel (state) or tracking the
>>>pgid of the daemon (state).
>>
>>If you want to fire up a new daemon, all that state that was supposed to
>>be kept in userspace has to be reconstructed.  That means the kernel has
>>to have all that information; this would include stuff like what kind of
>>umount policy you want for each key entry (the current daemon doesn't do
>>that because it doesn't have the proper state.)
> 
> I'm not really sure what you're saying., here.  I'm sorry.  Not trying to be
> thick, just not understanding.
> 
> What umount policy?  What state is supposed to be kept in userspace that isn't?
> 

The current autofs daemon, for example, does not handle different
procedures on umount.  This is particularly important when you have
mount trees.

> 
>>>The daemon as it stands does NOT handle namespaces, does NOT handle expiry
>>>well, and is a pretty sad copy of an old design.
>>
>>First of all, I'll be blunt: namespaces currently provide zero benefit
>>in Linux, and virtually noone uses them.  I have discussed this with
>>Linus in the past, and neither one of us see namespaces as being worth
> 
> Let's get rid of them, then.  Make life that much easier.
> 

That's what the Linux community is doing, de facto.  The Linux userspace
simply is not set up to handle namespaces, and the autofs daemon is no
exception.  Consider such a simple thing as /etc/mtab - /proc/mounts
which is necessary for most of the mount(8) functionality to work.  It
doesn't support namespaces and really cannot be made to.

namespace support in Linux is at the best a far-off future goal.  It is
one thing to put in infrastructure, especially since it has some other
nice benefits; it's another thing to revamp all of userspace to use it;
it's nowhere close and autofs is no exception.

	-hpa


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Tim Hockin <thockin@hockin.org>
Cc: autofs <autofs@linux.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Towards a Modern Autofs
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 14:20:57 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3FFB34C9.5010305@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040106221502.GA7398@hockin.org>

Tim Hockin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 02:06:34PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> 
>>>Can you maybe share some details?  I think this deign moves MORE state to
>>>userspace (expiry aside).  The "state" in kernel is really mostly sent back
>>>to userspace.  No more passing pipes into the kernel (state) or tracking the
>>>pgid of the daemon (state).
>>
>>If you want to fire up a new daemon, all that state that was supposed to
>>be kept in userspace has to be reconstructed.  That means the kernel has
>>to have all that information; this would include stuff like what kind of
>>umount policy you want for each key entry (the current daemon doesn't do
>>that because it doesn't have the proper state.)
> 
> I'm not really sure what you're saying., here.  I'm sorry.  Not trying to be
> thick, just not understanding.
> 
> What umount policy?  What state is supposed to be kept in userspace that isn't?
> 

The current autofs daemon, for example, does not handle different
procedures on umount.  This is particularly important when you have
mount trees.

> 
>>>The daemon as it stands does NOT handle namespaces, does NOT handle expiry
>>>well, and is a pretty sad copy of an old design.
>>
>>First of all, I'll be blunt: namespaces currently provide zero benefit
>>in Linux, and virtually noone uses them.  I have discussed this with
>>Linus in the past, and neither one of us see namespaces as being worth
> 
> Let's get rid of them, then.  Make life that much easier.
> 

That's what the Linux community is doing, de facto.  The Linux userspace
simply is not set up to handle namespaces, and the autofs daemon is no
exception.  Consider such a simple thing as /etc/mtab - /proc/mounts
which is necessary for most of the mount(8) functionality to work.  It
doesn't support namespaces and really cannot be made to.

namespace support in Linux is at the best a far-off future goal.  It is
one thing to put in infrastructure, especially since it has some other
nice benefits; it's another thing to revamp all of userspace to use it;
it's nowhere close and autofs is no exception.

	-hpa

  parent reply	other threads:[~2004-01-06 22:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 115+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-01-06 19:55 [RFC] Towards a Modern Autofs Mike Waychison
2004-01-06 19:55 ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-06 21:01 ` [autofs] " H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-06 21:01   ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-06 21:44   ` [autofs] " Mike Waychison
2004-01-06 21:44     ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-06 21:50   ` [autofs] " Tim Hockin
2004-01-06 21:50     ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-06 22:06     ` [autofs] " H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-06 22:06       ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-06 22:17       ` [autofs] " Tim Hockin
     [not found]       ` <20040106221502.GA7398@hockin.org>
2004-01-06 22:20         ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2004-01-06 22:20           ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-07 16:19           ` [autofs] " Mike Waychison
2004-01-07 16:19             ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-07 17:55             ` [autofs] " H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-07 21:13               ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-06 22:28       ` name spaces good (was: [autofs] [RFC] Towards a Modern Autofs) Dax Kelson
2004-01-06 22:48         ` name spaces good H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-06 22:48           ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-07 21:14 ` [autofs] [RFC] Towards a Modern Autofs Jim Carter
2004-01-07 21:14   ` Jim Carter
2004-01-07 22:55   ` [autofs] " Mike Waychison
2004-01-07 22:55     ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-08 12:00     ` [autofs] " Ian Kent
2004-01-08 12:00       ` Ian Kent
2004-01-08 15:39       ` [autofs] " Mike Waychison
2004-01-09 18:20         ` Ian Kent
2004-01-09 18:20           ` Ian Kent
2004-01-09 20:06           ` [autofs] " Mike Waychison
2004-01-09 20:06             ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-10  5:43             ` [autofs] " Ian Kent
2004-01-12 13:07               ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-12 16:01                 ` raven
2004-01-12 16:26                   ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-12 22:50                     ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-12 23:28                       ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-13  1:30                       ` Ian Kent
2004-01-13  1:30                         ` Ian Kent
2004-01-12 16:28                   ` [autofs] " raven
2004-01-12 16:58                     ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-13  1:54                       ` Ian Kent
2004-01-13  1:54                         ` Ian Kent
2004-01-13 19:01                         ` [autofs] " Mike Waychison
2004-01-13 19:01                           ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-14 15:58                           ` [autofs] " raven
2004-01-14 19:32                             ` running out of mount points Greg Bradner
2004-01-19 15:48                               ` Greg Bradner
2004-01-19 17:11                                 ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-19 19:07                                   ` Greg Bradner
2004-01-20 19:15                                 ` Jim Carter
2004-01-13 18:46                   ` [autofs] [RFC] Towards a Modern Autofs Mike Waychison
2004-01-13 18:46                     ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-09 20:51           ` [autofs] " Jim Carter
2004-01-09 20:51             ` Jim Carter
2004-01-10  5:56             ` [autofs] " Ian Kent
2004-01-08 17:34       ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-08 19:41         ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-08 23:42         ` Michael Clark
2004-01-09 20:28           ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-09 20:28             ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-09 20:54             ` [autofs] " H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-09 20:54               ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-09 21:43               ` [autofs] " Mike Waychison
2004-01-09 21:43                 ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-09 18:32         ` [autofs] " Ian Kent
2004-01-09 18:32           ` Ian Kent
2004-01-09 20:52           ` [autofs] " Mike Waychison
2004-01-09 20:52             ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-10  6:05             ` [autofs] " Ian Kent
2004-01-08 12:29     ` Olivier Galibert
2004-01-08 13:20       ` Robin Rosenberg
2004-01-08 16:23       ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-08 12:35     ` Ian Kent
2004-01-08 13:08       ` Ian Kent
2004-01-08 18:20     ` Jim Carter
2004-01-08 21:01       ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-08  0:48   ` Ian Kent
2004-01-08  0:48     ` Ian Kent
2004-01-06 22:28 [autofs] " Ogden, Aaron A.
2004-01-06 22:41 ` Mike Fedyk
2004-01-06 22:47 ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-06 22:53 ` Paul Raines
2004-01-07 23:14 ` Jim Carter
2004-01-07 23:32   ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-08 12:52     ` Ian Kent
2004-01-08 12:52       ` Ian Kent
2004-01-08 18:31       ` viro
2004-01-09 18:43         ` Ian Kent
2004-01-09 19:41         ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-09 19:57           ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-09 21:31             ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-09 21:36               ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-06 23:34 Ogden, Aaron A.
2004-01-06 23:47 ` Tim Hockin
     [not found] <1b5GC-29h-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found] ` <1b6CO-3v0-15@gated-at.bofh.it>
2004-01-07  4:21   ` Andi Kleen
2004-01-07 17:50     ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-07 21:04       ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-07 21:11         ` Mike Fedyk
2004-01-07 23:40           ` Jesper Juhl
2004-01-07 21:24         ` Jeff Garzik
2004-01-07 23:47           ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-07 23:56             ` Jeff Garzik
2004-01-12 16:57               ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-13  7:39                 ` Ian Kent
2004-01-08 19:32 trond.myklebust
2004-01-08 19:41 ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-08 20:08   ` trond.myklebust
2004-01-08 21:13     ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-08 22:20       ` J. Bruce Fields
2004-01-08 22:24         ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-09 20:37       ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-09 21:02         ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-01-09 21:52           ` Mike Waychison
2004-01-09 20:16   ` Mike Waychison

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3FFB34C9.5010305@zytor.com \
    --to=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=autofs@linux.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=thockin@hockin.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.