From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1422650AbWGNSP2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jul 2006 14:15:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1422652AbWGNSP2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jul 2006 14:15:28 -0400 Received: from pat.uio.no ([129.240.10.4]:53142 "EHLO pat.uio.no") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1422650AbWGNSP2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jul 2006 14:15:28 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 5/7] add user namespace From: Trond Myklebust To: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: Dave Hansen , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Cedric Le Goater , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Kirill Korotaev , Andrey Savochkin , Herbert Poetzl , Sam Vilain In-Reply-To: References: <1152815391.7650.58.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1152821011.24925.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1152887287.24925.22.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060714162935.GA25303@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> <1152896138.24925.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060714170814.GE25303@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> <1152897579.24925.80.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 14:15:11 -0400 Message-Id: <1152900911.5729.30.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UiO-Spam-info: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-3.835, required 12, autolearn=disabled, AWL 1.17, UIO_MAIL_IS_INTERNAL -5.00) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2006-07-14 at 11:36 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Dave Hansen writes: > > > On Fri, 2006-07-14 at 12:08 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > >> yes, of course, vfsmount, which I assume is what Eric meant? > >> > >> Which means we'd have to do this at permission() using the nameidata, or > >> pass nd to generic_permission. > > > > Yeah, I think so. But, this is well into Al territory, and there might > > be a better way. > > Well until we get that sorted out I will keep picking on i_sb. Don't bother: labelling superblocks with process-specific data is always going to be unacceptable. In order to avoid aliased superblocks, you would have to be able guarantee to be the sole owner of the data on the device that it refers to. You'd have to own the device in order to do that, in which case you are better off just labelling the device instead. Cheers, Trond