Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mail-vc0-f180.google.com ([209.85.220.180]:58612 "EHLO mail-vc0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751572AbbBPXGH (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Feb 2015 18:06:07 -0500 Received: by mail-vc0-f180.google.com with SMTP id im6so11480089vcb.11 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 15:06:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20150216201751.GB22154@fieldses.org> References: <20150216122107.4bfd4225@notabene.brown> <20150216201751.GB22154@fieldses.org> Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 18:06:06 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC nfs-utils] exports.man: improve documentation of 'nohide' and 'crossmnt' From: Trond Myklebust To: "J. Bruce Fields" Cc: NeilBrown , Steve Dickson , NFS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 3:17 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 12:21:07PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: >> >> >> - note that 'nohide' is irrelevant for NFSv4 >> - note that children on a 'crossmnt' filesystem cannot be unexported >> - note that 'nocrossmnt' is a valid option, but probably not useful. >> >> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown >> >> --- >> >> I wonder if we should add a new option, e.g. "noaccess" so that children >> of a "crossmnt" filesystem can be hidden. The kernel wouldn't need to >> know about this. It would just tell mountd to refuse to export that >> filesystem even if the parent was "crossmnt". >> ?? > > Seems logical enough, but I can't recall seeing requests for it, and > the options here already seem complicated enough. > > In theory something like that could also be done with namespaces. (So, > run mountd in a separate mount namespace that lacks those children.) Agreed. It seems unnecessarily complicated to add yet another option to the crossmnt/nohide saga. If the "nohide" documentation is too complex, then we should rather aim to improve that documentation. -- Trond Myklebust Linux NFS client maintainer, PrimaryData trond.myklebust@primarydata.com