From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261474AbVCaOlC (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Mar 2005 09:41:02 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261473AbVCaOkw (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Mar 2005 09:40:52 -0500 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:29672 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261470AbVCaOkk (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Mar 2005 09:40:40 -0500 Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 15:40:26 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Blaisorblade Cc: user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, akpm@osdl.org, jdike@addtoit.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [uml-devel] Re: [patch 03/12] uml: export getgid for hostfs Message-ID: <20050331144026.GA18248@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Blaisorblade , user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, akpm@osdl.org, jdike@addtoit.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20050322162123.890086BA6F@zion> <200503240302.29153.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> <20050329114529.GA26005@infradead.org> <200503302005.26311.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200503302005.26311.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 08:05:26PM +0200, Blaisorblade wrote: > > My unaswered reply to the first submission is at > > > > http://groups-beta.google.com/group/linux.kernel/messages/de9504fe5963ccd1, > >0c05294c599b22b1,eab26a4ed3f8ff17?thread_id=16c905c7e28e7498&mode=thread&noh > >eader=1&q=uml-export-getgid-for-hostfs#doc_eab26a4ed3f8ff17 > > > > (sorry, couldn't find it on marc), it's been Cc'ed to the lists you sent > > the patch to. > Sorry, I wasn't clear... I read *that* answer, but it says "as mentioned in > the discussion about ROOT_DEV", and I couldn't find it. That'd be: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=110664428918937&w=2 > Also, I'd like to know whether there's a correct way to implement this (using > something different than root_dev, for instance the init[1] root directory > mount device). I understand that with the possibility for multiple mounts the > "root device" is more difficult to know (and maybe this is the reason for > which ROOT_DEV is bogus, is this?), but at least a check on the param > "rootfstype=hostfs" could be done. personally I think it's a bad misfeature by itself. If you absolutely want it make it a mount option so it's explicit at least. And yes, the only place where ROOT_DEV makes sense is in the early boot process where the first filesystem in the first namespace is mounted, that's why I want to get rid of the export to modules for it. > Ok, this is nice. I'll repost the (updated) patch CC'ing Ingo Molnar (unless > there's another Ingo). Yupp, mingo