Messages in this thread | | | From | Andy Lutomirski <> | Date | Fri, 21 Nov 2014 08:35:11 -0800 | Subject | Re: kdbus: add node and filesystem implementation |
| |
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 9:02 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > From: Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> > > kdbusfs is a filesystem that will expose a fresh kdbus domain context > each time it is mounted. Per mount point, there will be a 'control' > node, which can be used to create buses. fs.c contains the > implementation of that pseudo-fs. Exported inodes of 'file' type have > their i_fop set to either kdbus_handle_control_ops or > kdbus_handle_ep_ops, depending on their type. The actual dispatching > of file operations is done from handle.c > > node.c is an implementation of a kdbus object that has an id and > children, organized in an R/B tree. The tree is used by the filesystem > code for lookup and iterator functions, and to deactivate children > once the parent is deactivated. Every inode exported by kdbusfs is > backed by a kdbus_node, hence it is embedded in struct kdbus_ep, > struct kdbus_bus and struct kdbus_domain. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> > Signed-off-by: David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@gmail.com> > Signed-off-by: Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@opendz.org> > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> > ---
> + > +static struct file_system_type fs_type = { > + .name = KBUILD_MODNAME "fs", > + .owner = THIS_MODULE, > + .mount = fs_super_mount, > + .kill_sb = fs_super_kill, > +};
Does this want something like:
.fs_flags = FS_USERNS_MOUNT
This design may have the annoying property that, if a namespace-based sandbox wants to use kdbus itself, it will need to proxy anything from the parent that it wants to use.
Is there a good reason why individual *busses* don't show up in the filesystem? If they did, maybe they could be bind-mounted or otherwise arranged to cross namespace boundaries.
--Andy
| |