Re: [PATCH RESEND v9 3/8] proc: move hide_pid, pid_gid from pid_namespace to proc_fs_info

[Alexey Dobriyan]

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 02:21:59PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 1:46 PM Alexey Gladkov <gladkov.alexey@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > +/* definitions for hide_pid field */
> > +enum {
> > +       HIDEPID_OFF       = 0,
> > +       HIDEPID_NO_ACCESS = 1,
> > +       HIDEPID_INVISIBLE = 2,
> > +};
> 
> Should this enum be named...
> 
> >  struct proc_fs_info {
> >         struct pid_namespace *pid_ns;
> >         struct dentry *proc_self;        /* For /proc/self */
> >         struct dentry *proc_thread_self; /* For /proc/thread-self */
> > +       kgid_t pid_gid;
> > +       int hide_pid;
> >  };
> 
> .. and then used here instead of "int"?
> 
> Same goes for 'struct proc_fs_context' too, for that matter?
> 
> And maybe in the function declarations and definitions too? In things
> like 'has_pid_permissions()' (the series adds some other cases later,
> like hidepid2str() etc)
> 
> Yeah, enums and ints are kind of interchangeable in C, but even if it
> wouldn't give us any more typechecking (except perhaps with sparse if
> you mark it so), it would be documenting the use.
> 
> Or am I missing something?
> 
> Anyway, I continue to think the series looks fine, bnut would love to
> see it in -next and perhaps comments from Al and Alexey Dobriyan..

Patches are OK, except the part where "pid" is named "pidfs" and
the suffix doesn't convey any information.

	mount -t proc -o subset=pid,sysctl,misc

Reviewed-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx>