On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 06:21:30PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
quoted text
> On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 22:48 +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > I disagree.  First of all, clear separation between operations on
> > _filesystem_, which should all be namespace-agnostic and things
> > that depend on vfsmount is a Good Thing(tm).  Think of that as
> > of separation between server (superblock and everything related
> > to it, starting with dentry tree) and clients; mixing those is a
> > bloody bad idea.
> 
> Speaking of which: is there any reason why we can't get rid of the
> vfsmount reference in struct file?
> 
> Most file operations, don't involve namespace traversal at all: aside
> from fchdir(), and the *at() functions (all of which take file
> descriptors, not pointers to struct file) the only function of that
> vfsmount reference appears to be to prevent the superblock from going
> away.

Huh?  Are you proposing to move that to descriptor table, of all things?
Not to mention SCM_RIGHTS datagrams and hell knows what else...
--
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