Re: [PATCH 3/7] shared subtree

From: Miklos Szeredi
Date: Thu Jul 28 2005 - 03:38:31 EST

> yes we agreed on returning EINVAL when a directory is attempted to made
> shared/private/slave/unclonnable. But this is a different case.
> lets say /mnt is a mountpoint having a vfsmount (say A).
> now if you run
> mount --bind /mnt/a /tmp
> this operation succeeds currently.
> now lets say /mnt is a mountpoint having a vfsmount which is shared.
> now if you run
> mount --bind /mnt/a /tmp
> we now have a mount at /tmp which gets propogation from mounts under
> /mnt/a. right?


> but /mnt/a is not a mountpoint at all. if we need to track and
> propogate mounts/unmounts under /tmp or /mnt/a we need to have a mount
> at /mnt/a.

I don't think we do. You can just check at propagation time if the
propagated mountpoint is visible in the destination mount or not.
Just like --rbind checks whether children mounts are below or above
the to-be-bound directory.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at