Re: [PATCH 12/18] shared mount handling: bind and rbind

[Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>]

On Tue, 2005-11-08 at 06:11, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> >  static void attach_mnt(struct vfsmount *mnt, struct nameidata *nd)
> >  {
> > -	mnt->mnt_parent = mntget(nd->mnt);
> > -	mnt->mnt_mountpoint = dget(nd->dentry);
> > -	list_add(&mnt->mnt_hash, mount_hashtable + hash(nd->mnt, nd->dentry));
> > +	mnt_set_mountpoint(nd->mnt, nd->dentry, mnt);
> > +	list_add_tail(&mnt->mnt_hash, mount_hashtable +
> > +			hash(nd->mnt, nd->dentry));
> 
> Ram,
> 
> IIRC the list_add -> list_add_tail change has been voted down.  Or do
> you have new reasons why it's needed?

No. As explained in the same earlier threads; without this change the
behavior of shared-subtrees leads to inconsistency and confusion in some
scenarios.

Under the premise that no application should depend on this behavior
(most-recent-mount-visible v/s top-most-mount-visible),  Al Viro
permitted this change. And this is certainly the right behavior.

RP
> 
> Miklos
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

-
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/