On Mon, 17 Apr 2000, Richard Gooch wrote:
> What an appallingly bad idea. So instead of one filesystem, we now
> have dozens?!? Talk about kernel bloat! So what exactly is the point
> of this exercise? What problems are you solving? And if you are
> solving any real technical problems, why can't that be done with
> devfs+devfsd?
Mutilated Cthulhu on the Enola Gay!
Richard. Try to realize it. Your multiple-mount code is BROKEN. Please,
stop repeating "it's OK, I see no problems" - the latter is probably true,
but the former is profoundly false.
Just how many times should it be repeated before it will sink in?
Having. Multiple. Detries. For. One. Writable. Directory. Is. Broken.
Having multiple inodes for such directory is absolutely broken.
Mounting devfs several times gives you exactly that. Ergo, it is broken.
Mount-patches will not save you unless you'll go for several independent
dentry trees - one for each driver. _Methods_ can and should be the same,
indeed. So no bloat is induced - just that either have each of these trees
_once_ and every "devfs" mountpoint refers to several such trees _or_ you
got a broken kernel.
There is no way to share _part_ of the tree. So if you have one tree you
either not share it at all (see above) or you need to mount on
all-or-nothing basis.
Sigh... _How_ can you be so thick? That stuff had been explained several
times during the last month. Privately, on l-k, in other places... It had
been told to you before - many times, actually. All you answer is "None of
the people who use devfs had security/DoS problems because of devfs". If
you really believe that it's a valid attitude - you have no business
working with any security-related code. If you don't - wake up and try to
realize what the problem is. You ought to know better than that.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 23 2000 - 21:00:11 EST