From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:34074 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750750AbeFAGjc (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jun 2018 02:39:32 -0400 Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 07:39:28 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: David Howells , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 30/32] vfs: Allow cloning of a mount tree with open(O_PATH|O_CLONE_MOUNT) [ver #8] Message-ID: <20180601063928.GS30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <152720672288.9073.9868393448836301272.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <152720691829.9073.10564431140980997005.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20180601062654.GA32397@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180601062654.GA32397@infradead.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 11:26:54PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 01:08:38AM +0100, David Howells wrote: > > Make it possible to clone a mount tree with a new pair of open flags that > > are used in conjunction with O_PATH: > > > > (1) O_CLONE_MOUNT - Clone the mount or mount tree at the path. > > > > (2) O_NON_RECURSIVE - Don't clone recursively. > > Err. I don't think we should use up two O_* flags for something > only useful for your new mount API. Don't we have a better place > to for these flags? > > Instead of overloading this on open having a specific syscalls just > seems like a much saner idea. It's not just mount API; these can be used independently of that. Think of the uses where you pass those to ...at() and you'll see a bunch of applications of that thing.