Message-ID: <519ED883.9060903@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 11:03:31 +0800
From: Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110930 Thunderbird/7.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stephen Mell <sub.atomic.fusion@gmail.com>
CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc: move proc mount options out of pid_namespace
References: <3342521.NtikuogILA@pegasus> <519DED89.9000409@cn.fujitsu.com> <2515335.Kvy7Q1OKc4@pegasus>
In-Reply-To: <2515335.Kvy7Q1OKc4@pegasus>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1167
Lines: 39

Hi Stephen,

On 05/24/2013 07:32 AM, Stephen Mell wrote:

> On Thursday, May 23, 2013 18:20:57 Gu Zheng wrote:
> 
>> Here it'll create a new proc sb instance which holds the same context as the old ones
>> each time we mount proc though in the same PID namespace, won't it?
> I believe so. But this is the point, right? 

Yes, but I think it's also the problem.

>They won't be identical if different mount options are used, I don't think.

If different mount options are used, we'll create different super block instance, and they have
the same context, only the difference is each one holds different proc_sb_info.
But I think what we really want is only one proc sb instance and create different proc_sb_info
if different mount options are used.

> 
>> Here the pre-check seems needless.
> Is that new with my patch, or has it always been needless?

Yeah, it's always needless.

Thanks,
Gu

> 
> Thanks,
> Stephen
> 


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/