On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 09:00:15PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 02:21:59PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 1:46 PM Alexey Gladkov [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

+/* definitions for hide_pid field */
+enum {
+       HIDEPID_OFF       = 0,
+       HIDEPID_NO_ACCESS = 1,
+       HIDEPID_INVISIBLE = 2,
+};

Should this enum be named...

quoted

 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.

I will fix this in the final version.

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

I have not yet figured out how to implement this. I mean subset=meminfo,misc.

-- 
Rgrds, legion