Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 9 Apr 2021 12:27:58 +0000
From:   Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@redhat.com>
Cc:     linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>,
        Olga Kornievskaia <aglo@umich.edu>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] vfs/security/NFS/btrfs: clean up and fix LSM option
 handling
Message-ID: <YHBITqlAfOk8IV5w@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>
References: <20210409111254.271800-1-omosnace@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210409111254.271800-1-omosnace@redhat.com>
Sender: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 01:12:52PM +0200, Ondrej Mosnacek wrote:
> This series attempts to clean up part of the mess that has grown around
> the LSM mount option handling across different subsystems.

I would not describe growing another FS_... flag *AND* spreading the
FS_BINARY_MOUNTDATA further, with rather weird semantics at that,
as a cleanup of any sort.

I still very much dislike that approach.