Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-20 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On April 20, 2016 4:50:53 AM PDT, "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" wrote: >On 2016-04-19 23:27, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> "H. Peter Anvin" writes: >> >>> On April 19, 2016 12:25:03 PM PDT, "H. Peter Anvin" >wrote: Perhaps a (privileged)

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-20 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On April 20, 2016 4:50:53 AM PDT, "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" wrote: >On 2016-04-19 23:27, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> "H. Peter Anvin" writes: >> >>> On April 19, 2016 12:25:03 PM PDT, "H. Peter Anvin" >wrote: Perhaps a (privileged) option to exempt from the global limit, >then.

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-20 Thread Austin S. Hemmelgarn
On 2016-04-19 23:27, Eric W. Biederman wrote: "H. Peter Anvin" writes: On April 19, 2016 12:25:03 PM PDT, "H. Peter Anvin" wrote: Perhaps a (privileged) option to exempt from the global limit, then. Something we can implement if asked for. However, I

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-20 Thread Austin S. Hemmelgarn
On 2016-04-19 23:27, Eric W. Biederman wrote: "H. Peter Anvin" writes: On April 19, 2016 12:25:03 PM PDT, "H. Peter Anvin" wrote: Perhaps a (privileged) option to exempt from the global limit, then. Something we can implement if asked for. However, I wouldn't be 100% that the reserved

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread Eric W. Biederman
"H. Peter Anvin" writes: > On April 19, 2016 12:25:03 PM PDT, "H. Peter Anvin" wrote: >> >>Perhaps a (privileged) option to exempt from the global limit, then. >>Something we can implement if asked for. >> >>However, I wouldn't be 100% that the reserved pool

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread Eric W. Biederman
"H. Peter Anvin" writes: > On April 19, 2016 12:25:03 PM PDT, "H. Peter Anvin" wrote: >> >>Perhaps a (privileged) option to exempt from the global limit, then. >>Something we can implement if asked for. >> >>However, I wouldn't be 100% that the reserved pool isn't used. Someone >>added it

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On April 19, 2016 6:24:12 PM PDT, Linus Torvalds wrote: >On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Linus Torvalds > wrote: >> >> I _violently_ oppose the stupid DEVPTS_MULTIPLE_INSTANCES config >option. > >So just to show what I want to

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On April 19, 2016 6:24:12 PM PDT, Linus Torvalds wrote: >On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Linus Torvalds > wrote: >> >> I _violently_ oppose the stupid DEVPTS_MULTIPLE_INSTANCES config >option. > >So just to show what I want to actually happen, here's the hacky patch >on top of my (now merged)

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > I _violently_ oppose the stupid DEVPTS_MULTIPLE_INSTANCES config option. So just to show what I want to actually happen, here's the hacky patch on top of my (now merged) cleanup patch that actually does

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > I _violently_ oppose the stupid DEVPTS_MULTIPLE_INSTANCES config option. So just to show what I want to actually happen, here's the hacky patch on top of my (now merged) cleanup patch that actually does what I want devpts to do. I say

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Linus Torvalds writes: >> >> No. >> >> We want to get *rid* of the idiotic "primary instance" crap. > > That is actually pretty much the opposite of what you said last time, > but

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Linus Torvalds writes: >> >> No. >> >> We want to get *rid* of the idiotic "primary instance" crap. > > That is actually pretty much the opposite of what you said last time, > but having looked at the cost to maintian a "primary

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On April 19, 2016 12:25:03 PM PDT, "H. Peter Anvin" wrote: >On April 19, 2016 12:03:47 PM PDT, ebied...@xmission.com wrote: >>"H. Peter Anvin" writes: >> - Support for reserving ptys for the system devpts instance using /proc/sys/kernel/pty/reserve needs

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On April 19, 2016 12:25:03 PM PDT, "H. Peter Anvin" wrote: >On April 19, 2016 12:03:47 PM PDT, ebied...@xmission.com wrote: >>"H. Peter Anvin" writes: >> - Support for reserving ptys for the system devpts instance using /proc/sys/kernel/pty/reserve needs to be removed. Eric

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On April 19, 2016 12:03:47 PM PDT, ebied...@xmission.com wrote: >"H. Peter Anvin" writes: > >>>- Support for reserving ptys for the system devpts instance using >>> /proc/sys/kernel/pty/reserve needs to be removed. >>> >>>Eric >> >> pty capping should probably be a devpts mount

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On April 19, 2016 12:03:47 PM PDT, ebied...@xmission.com wrote: >"H. Peter Anvin" writes: > >>>- Support for reserving ptys for the system devpts instance using >>> /proc/sys/kernel/pty/reserve needs to be removed. >>> >>>Eric >> >> pty capping should probably be a devpts mount option > >There

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread Eric W. Biederman
"H. Peter Anvin" writes: >>- Support for reserving ptys for the system devpts instance using >> /proc/sys/kernel/pty/reserve needs to be removed. >> >>Eric > > pty capping should probably be a devpts mount option There is a max option so pty capping is a per devpts option. > ,

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread Eric W. Biederman
"H. Peter Anvin" writes: >>- Support for reserving ptys for the system devpts instance using >> /proc/sys/kernel/pty/reserve needs to be removed. >> >>Eric > > pty capping should probably be a devpts mount option There is a max option so pty capping is a per devpts option. > , and perhaps a >

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On April 19, 2016 11:22:24 AM PDT, ebied...@xmission.com wrote: >Linus Torvalds writes: > >> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric W. Biederman >> wrote: >>> The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance >of >>> devpts.

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On April 19, 2016 11:22:24 AM PDT, ebied...@xmission.com wrote: >Linus Torvalds writes: > >> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric W. Biederman >> wrote: >>> The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance >of >>> devpts. To retain the notion of a primary system instance of

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On April 19, 2016 11:22:24 AM PDT, ebied...@xmission.com wrote: >Linus Torvalds writes: > >> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric W. Biederman >> wrote: >>> The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance >of >>> devpts.

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On April 19, 2016 11:22:24 AM PDT, ebied...@xmission.com wrote: >Linus Torvalds writes: > >> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric W. Biederman >> wrote: >>> The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance >of >>> devpts. To retain the notion of a primary system instance of

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Linus Torvalds writes: > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric W. Biederman > wrote: >> The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance of >> devpts. To retain the notion of a primary system instance of devpts >> the code

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-19 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Linus Torvalds writes: > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric W. Biederman > wrote: >> The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance of >> devpts. To retain the notion of a primary system instance of devpts >> the code needs a way to allow userspace to mount the

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-15 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance of > devpts. To retain the notion of a primary system instance of devpts > the code needs a way to allow userspace to mount the internally >

Re: [PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-15 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance of > devpts. To retain the notion of a primary system instance of devpts > the code needs a way to allow userspace to mount the internally > mounted instance of devpts

[PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-15 Thread Eric W. Biederman
The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance of devpts. To retain the notion of a primary system instance of devpts the code needs a way to allow userspace to mount the internally mounted instance of devpts when it is not currently mounted by userspace. The new helper

[PATCH 14/16] vfs: Implement mount_super_once

2016-04-15 Thread Eric W. Biederman
The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance of devpts. To retain the notion of a primary system instance of devpts the code needs a way to allow userspace to mount the internally mounted instance of devpts when it is not currently mounted by userspace. The new helper