Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-95159-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 08:46:08 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Baokun Li <libaokun1@huawei.com>
Cc: linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org, xiang@kernel.org, chao@kernel.org,
	huyue2@coolpad.com, jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yangerkun@huawei.com,
	houtao1@huawei.com, yukuai3@huawei.com, chengzhihao1@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] erofs: fix lockdep false positives on initializing
 erofs_pseudo_mnt
Message-ID: <20240307084608.GD538574@ZenIV>
References: <20240307024459.883044-1-libaokun1@huawei.com>
 <20240307050717.GB538574@ZenIV>
 <7e9746db-033e-64d0-a3d5-9d341c66cec7@huawei.com>
 <20240307072112.GC538574@ZenIV>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240307072112.GC538574@ZenIV>
Sender: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>

On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 07:21:12AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 03:06:49PM +0800, Baokun Li wrote:
> > > > +int erofs_anon_register_fs(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	return register_filesystem(&erofs_anon_fs_type);
> > > > +}
> > > What for?  The only thing it gives you is an ability to look it up by
> > > name.  Which is completely pointless, IMO,
> > The helper function here is to avoid extern erofs_anon_fs_type(), because
> > we define it in fscache.c, but also use it in super.c. Moreover, we don't
> > need
> > to register it when CONFIG_EROFS_FS_ONDEMAND is not enabled, so we
> 
> You don't need to register it at all.
> 
> The one and only effect of register_filesystem() is making file_system_type
> instance visible to get_fs_type() (and making it show up in /proc/filesystems).
> 
> That's it.  If you want to have it looked up by name (e.g. for userland
> mounts), you need to register.  If not, you do not need to do that.
> 
> Note that kern_mount() take a pointer to struct file_system_type,
> not its (string) name.  So all you get from registration is an extra line
> in /proc/filesystems.  What's the point?

PS: at one point I considered renaming it to something that would sound
less vague, but the best variant I'd been able to come up with was
"publish_filesystem()", which is not much better and has an extra problem -
how do you describe the reverse of that?  "withdraw_filesystem()"?
Decided that it wasn't worth the amount of noise and headache...