Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 22:45:50 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: Craig Rodrigues <rodrigc@freebsd.org> Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sbin/fsck_ffs main.c Message-ID: <200808222245.50842.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200808230121.m7N1LM79093524@repoman.freebsd.org> References: <200808230121.m7N1LM79093524@repoman.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 22 August 2008 09:21:10 pm Craig Rodrigues wrote: > rodrigc 2008-08-23 01:21:10 UTC > > FreeBSD src repository > > Modified files: > sbin/fsck_ffs main.c > Log: > SVN rev 182027 on 2008-08-23 01:21:10Z by rodrigc > > Instead of passing MNT_UPDATE, MNT_SNAPSHOT, MNT_RELOAD from > userspace to kernel via nmount(), pass in the strings > "update", "snapshot", "reload". > > We want to move away from passing MNT_ flags from userspace -> kernel > via nmount(), and instead favor passing the string options. > > Revision Changes Path > 1.53 +3 -2 src/sbin/fsck_ffs/main.c Hmm, one thing that I've mentioned to you before though is that some options (like update) aren't mount options, they are flags to the mount() syscall that explain how to apply the list of options. Those sort of flags don't really belong in the mount options list it seems to be, but in a separate "flags" argument to nmount() itself. That would also remove the need for having the kernel weed out these options (force/update/etc.) from the mount options list by not having them there in the first place. I think having mount operation flags passed separately from mount options is going to be a less bug-prone and more stable approach. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200808222245.50842.jhb>