> > > And having the vfsmount available within vfs_...() functions means,
Traditionally we have syscalls, and nfsd. Both of them want the
security checks, and I think nfsd wants the read-only mount checking
as well, but I'm not entirely sure. Maybe we can handle that by just
making nfsd acquire a write-ref on the mount and keep it while it's
exported.
Then there's ecryptfs and unionfs, which probably need neither, but it
wouldn't hurt to do them anyway.
Still, even if there are only two callers, then moving stuff to up
doesn't make any sense. Passing down a struct path is free for the
syscall case, it doesn't consume any stack space or extra CPU. Do
please tell, why would that be such a bad thing?
Miklos
--