From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:35188 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726264AbeHXSBr (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:01:47 -0400 Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 16:26:49 +0200 From: Karel Zak To: Miklos Szeredi Cc: David Howells , "Theodore Y. Ts'o" , Andy Lutomirski , Al Viro , Linus Torvalds , Linux FS Devel , Linux API Subject: Re: [git pull] new mount API Message-ID: <20180824142649.be5tm6qvcq3o5k2s@ws.net.home> References: <24340.1535069316@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20180824003105.GL6515@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <184842E4-9368-463D-9131-D9A5F686C319@amacapital.net> <20180824031311.GM6515@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20180824060532.GG16817@thunk.org> <362.1535103931@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20180824141810.GA20975@veci.piliscsaba.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180824141810.GA20975@veci.piliscsaba.redhat.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 04:18:10PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > I'm bothered by the fact that we use the same MS_ prefix in the old mount(2) api > and the new fsmount(2) api. What happens if we introduce new flags for > fsmount(2) and are already out of flags for mount(2)? I see a big mess that > way. > > Also notice, how the old code just totally ignored MS_RELATIME? Bit of rot in > the new interface already. > > So here's a patch. The MNT_ prefix is already used by libmount, and we don't > want any confusion arising from that. So how about M_*? Short and sweet, just > like O_* for open(2). +1 Please. -- Karel Zak http://karelzak.blogspot.com