Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 4 Jun 2018 16:59:37 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To:     Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc:     David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] open_tree(2) (was Re: [PATCH 30/32] vfs: Allow
 cloning of a mount tree with open(O_PATH|O_CLONE_MOUNT) [ver #8])
Message-ID: <20180604155937.GI30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <152720691829.9073.10564431140980997005.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
 <20180601062654.GA32397@infradead.org>
 <7067.1527841663@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
 <20180602030913.GU30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20180602034255.GV30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <21804.1527954321@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
 <20180602174957.GX30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20180603005532.GZ30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <CAELBmZCXMkCY+Lkz2xmhUiK_5oDctZzozHP-cXv9vp7qWsOtVQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180604155205.GH30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180604155205.GH30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 04:52:05PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 12:34:44PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> 
> > fsopen = create fsfd
> > fsmount = fsfd -> mountfd & set attr on mountfd & attach mountfd
> > fspick = path -> fsfd
> > move_mount = attach mountfd or move existing
> > fsinfo = info from path
> > open_tree = new mountfd from path or clone
> > mount_setattr = set attr on mountfd
> > 
> > Notice that fsmount() encompasses mount_setattr() + move_mount()
> > functionality.   Split those out and leave fsmount() to actually do
> > the "fsfd ->mountfd" translation?
> 
> Might make sense.

FWIW, to make it clear: fsmount(2) in this series actually does *NOT*
attach it to the tree.  Commit message definitely needs updating - as it
is, it's

+SYSCALL_DEFINE5(fsmount, int, fs_fd, unsigned int, flags, unsigned int, ms_flags,
+               void *, reserved4, void *, reserved5)

PS: IMO these reserved... arguments are in bad taste; if anyone has good reasons
for that practice in ABI design, I'd like to hear those.