On Thursday January 17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On Jan 17 2008 00:43, Karel Zak wrote: > >> > >> Seems like a plain bad idea to me. There will be any number of home-made > >> /proc/mounts parsers and we don't know what they do. > > > > So, let's use /proc/mounts_v2 ;-) > > Was not it like "don't use /proc for new things"?
I thought it was "don't use /proc for new things that aren't process related". And as the mount table is per process...... A host has a bunch of mounted filesystems (struct super_block), and each process has some subset of these stitched together into a mount tree (struct vfsmount / struct namespace). There needs to be something in /proc that exposes the vfsmount tree. Arguably there should be something else - maybe in sysfs - that provides access to the "struct superblock" object. And there needs to be a clear way to relate information from one with information from the other. In the tradition of stat, statm, status, maybe the former should be /proc/$PID/mountm :-) Hey, I just found /proc/X/mountstats. How does this fit in to the big picture? NeilBrown -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
