diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/filesystems/sharedsubtree.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/filesystems/sharedsubtree.txt | 939 |
1 files changed, 939 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/sharedsubtree.txt b/Documentation/filesystems/sharedsubtree.txt new file mode 100644 index 000000000..8ccfbd552 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/sharedsubtree.txt @@ -0,0 +1,939 @@ +Shared Subtrees +--------------- + +Contents: + 1) Overview + 2) Features + 3) Setting mount states + 4) Use-case + 5) Detailed semantics + 6) Quiz + 7) FAQ + 8) Implementation + + +1) Overview +----------- + +Consider the following situation: + +A process wants to clone its own namespace, but still wants to access the CD +that got mounted recently. Shared subtree semantics provide the necessary +mechanism to accomplish the above. + +It provides the necessary building blocks for features like per-user-namespace +and versioned filesystem. + +2) Features +----------- + +Shared subtree provides four different flavors of mounts; struct vfsmount to be +precise + + a. shared mount + b. slave mount + c. private mount + d. unbindable mount + + +2a) A shared mount can be replicated to as many mountpoints and all the +replicas continue to be exactly same. + + Here is an example: + + Let's say /mnt has a mount that is shared. + mount --make-shared /mnt + + Note: mount(8) command now supports the --make-shared flag, + so the sample 'smount' program is no longer needed and has been + removed. + + # mount --bind /mnt /tmp + The above command replicates the mount at /mnt to the mountpoint /tmp + and the contents of both the mounts remain identical. + + #ls /mnt + a b c + + #ls /tmp + a b c + + Now let's say we mount a device at /tmp/a + # mount /dev/sd0 /tmp/a + + #ls /tmp/a + t1 t2 t3 + + #ls /mnt/a + t1 t2 t3 + + Note that the mount has propagated to the mount at /mnt as well. + + And the same is true even when /dev/sd0 is mounted on /mnt/a. The + contents will be visible under /tmp/a too. + + +2b) A slave mount is like a shared mount except that mount and umount events + only propagate towards it. + + All slave mounts have a master mount which is a shared. + + Here is an example: + + Let's say /mnt has a mount which is shared. + # mount --make-shared /mnt + + Let's bind mount /mnt to /tmp + # mount --bind /mnt /tmp + + the new mount at /tmp becomes a shared mount and it is a replica of + the mount at /mnt. + + Now let's make the mount at /tmp; a slave of /mnt + # mount --make-slave /tmp + + let's mount /dev/sd0 on /mnt/a + # mount /dev/sd0 /mnt/a + + #ls /mnt/a + t1 t2 t3 + + #ls /tmp/a + t1 t2 t3 + + Note the mount event has propagated to the mount at /tmp + + However let's see what happens if we mount something on the mount at /tmp + + # mount /dev/sd1 /tmp/b + + #ls /tmp/b + s1 s2 s3 + + #ls /mnt/b + + Note how the mount event has not propagated to the mount at + /mnt + + +2c) A private mount does not forward or receive propagation. + + This is the mount we are familiar with. Its the default type. + + +2d) A unbindable mount is a unbindable private mount + + let's say we have a mount at /mnt and we make it unbindable + + # mount --make-unbindable /mnt + + Let's try to bind mount this mount somewhere else. + # mount --bind /mnt /tmp + mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /mnt, + or too many mounted file systems + + Binding a unbindable mount is a invalid operation. + + +3) Setting mount states + + The mount command (util-linux package) can be used to set mount + states: + + mount --make-shared mountpoint + mount --make-slave mountpoint + mount --make-private mountpoint + mount --make-unbindable mountpoint + + +4) Use cases +------------ + + A) A process wants to clone its own namespace, but still wants to + access the CD that got mounted recently. + + Solution: + + The system administrator can make the mount at /cdrom shared + mount --bind /cdrom /cdrom + mount --make-shared /cdrom + + Now any process that clones off a new namespace will have a + mount at /cdrom which is a replica of the same mount in the + parent namespace. + + So when a CD is inserted and mounted at /cdrom that mount gets + propagated to the other mount at /cdrom in all the other clone + namespaces. + + B) A process wants its mounts invisible to any other process, but + still be able to see the other system mounts. + + Solution: + + To begin with, the administrator can mark the entire mount tree + as shareable. + + mount --make-rshared / + + A new process can clone off a new namespace. And mark some part + of its namespace as slave + + mount --make-rslave /myprivatetree + + Hence forth any mounts within the /myprivatetree done by the + process will not show up in any other namespace. However mounts + done in the parent namespace under /myprivatetree still shows + up in the process's namespace. + + + Apart from the above semantics this feature provides the + building blocks to solve the following problems: + + C) Per-user namespace + + The above semantics allows a way to share mounts across + namespaces. But namespaces are associated with processes. If + namespaces are made first class objects with user API to + associate/disassociate a namespace with userid, then each user + could have his/her own namespace and tailor it to his/her + requirements. This needs to be supported in PAM. + + D) Versioned files + + If the entire mount tree is visible at multiple locations, then + an underlying versioning file system can return different + versions of the file depending on the path used to access that + file. + + An example is: + + mount --make-shared / + mount --rbind / /view/v1 + mount --rbind / /view/v2 + mount --rbind / /view/v3 + mount --rbind / /view/v4 + + and if /usr has a versioning filesystem mounted, then that + mount appears at /view/v1/usr, /view/v2/usr, /view/v3/usr and + /view/v4/usr too + + A user can request v3 version of the file /usr/fs/namespace.c + by accessing /view/v3/usr/fs/namespace.c . The underlying + versioning filesystem can then decipher that v3 version of the + filesystem is being requested and return the corresponding + inode. + +5) Detailed semantics: +------------------- + The section below explains the detailed semantics of + bind, rbind, move, mount, umount and clone-namespace operations. + + Note: the word 'vfsmount' and the noun 'mount' have been used + to mean the same thing, throughout this document. + +5a) Mount states + + A given mount can be in one of the following states + 1) shared + 2) slave + 3) shared and slave + 4) private + 5) unbindable + + A 'propagation event' is defined as event generated on a vfsmount + that leads to mount or unmount actions in other vfsmounts. + + A 'peer group' is defined as a group of vfsmounts that propagate + events to each other. + + (1) Shared mounts + + A 'shared mount' is defined as a vfsmount that belongs to a + 'peer group'. + + For example: + mount --make-shared /mnt + mount --bind /mnt /tmp + + The mount at /mnt and that at /tmp are both shared and belong + to the same peer group. Anything mounted or unmounted under + /mnt or /tmp reflect in all the other mounts of its peer + group. + + + (2) Slave mounts + + A 'slave mount' is defined as a vfsmount that receives + propagation events and does not forward propagation events. + + A slave mount as the name implies has a master mount from which + mount/unmount events are received. Events do not propagate from + the slave mount to the master. Only a shared mount can be made + a slave by executing the following command + + mount --make-slave mount + + A shared mount that is made as a slave is no more shared unless + modified to become shared. + + (3) Shared and Slave + + A vfsmount can be both shared as well as slave. This state + indicates that the mount is a slave of some vfsmount, and + has its own peer group too. This vfsmount receives propagation + events from its master vfsmount, and also forwards propagation + events to its 'peer group' and to its slave vfsmounts. + + Strictly speaking, the vfsmount is shared having its own + peer group, and this peer-group is a slave of some other + peer group. + + Only a slave vfsmount can be made as 'shared and slave' by + either executing the following command + mount --make-shared mount + or by moving the slave vfsmount under a shared vfsmount. + + (4) Private mount + + A 'private mount' is defined as vfsmount that does not + receive or forward any propagation events. + + (5) Unbindable mount + + A 'unbindable mount' is defined as vfsmount that does not + receive or forward any propagation events and cannot + be bind mounted. + + + State diagram: + The state diagram below explains the state transition of a mount, + in response to various commands. + ------------------------------------------------------------------------ + | |make-shared | make-slave | make-private |make-unbindab| + --------------|------------|--------------|--------------|-------------| + |shared |shared |*slave/private| private | unbindable | + | | | | | | + |-------------|------------|--------------|--------------|-------------| + |slave |shared | **slave | private | unbindable | + | |and slave | | | | + |-------------|------------|--------------|--------------|-------------| + |shared |shared | slave | private | unbindable | + |and slave |and slave | | | | + |-------------|------------|--------------|--------------|-------------| + |private |shared | **private | private | unbindable | + |-------------|------------|--------------|--------------|-------------| + |unbindable |shared |**unbindable | private | unbindable | + ------------------------------------------------------------------------ + + * if the shared mount is the only mount in its peer group, making it + slave, makes it private automatically. Note that there is no master to + which it can be slaved to. + + ** slaving a non-shared mount has no effect on the mount. + + Apart from the commands listed below, the 'move' operation also changes + the state of a mount depending on type of the destination mount. Its + explained in section 5d. + +5b) Bind semantics + + Consider the following command + + mount --bind A/a B/b + + where 'A' is the source mount, 'a' is the dentry in the mount 'A', 'B' + is the destination mount and 'b' is the dentry in the destination mount. + + The outcome depends on the type of mount of 'A' and 'B'. The table + below contains quick reference. + --------------------------------------------------------------------------- + | BIND MOUNT OPERATION | + |************************************************************************** + |source(A)->| shared | private | slave | unbindable | + | dest(B) | | | | | + | | | | | | | + | v | | | | | + |************************************************************************** + | shared | shared | shared | shared & slave | invalid | + | | | | | | + |non-shared| shared | private | slave | invalid | + *************************************************************************** + + Details: + + 1. 'A' is a shared mount and 'B' is a shared mount. A new mount 'C' + which is clone of 'A', is created. Its root dentry is 'a' . 'C' is + mounted on mount 'B' at dentry 'b'. Also new mount 'C1', 'C2', 'C3' ... + are created and mounted at the dentry 'b' on all mounts where 'B' + propagates to. A new propagation tree containing 'C1',..,'Cn' is + created. This propagation tree is identical to the propagation tree of + 'B'. And finally the peer-group of 'C' is merged with the peer group + of 'A'. + + 2. 'A' is a private mount and 'B' is a shared mount. A new mount 'C' + which is clone of 'A', is created. Its root dentry is 'a'. 'C' is + mounted on mount 'B' at dentry 'b'. Also new mount 'C1', 'C2', 'C3' ... + are created and mounted at the dentry 'b' on all mounts where 'B' + propagates to. A new propagation tree is set containing all new mounts + 'C', 'C1', .., 'Cn' with exactly the same configuration as the + propagation tree for 'B'. + + 3. 'A' is a slave mount of mount 'Z' and 'B' is a shared mount. A new + mount 'C' which is clone of 'A', is created. Its root dentry is 'a' . + 'C' is mounted on mount 'B' at dentry 'b'. Also new mounts 'C1', 'C2', + 'C3' ... are created and mounted at the dentry 'b' on all mounts where + 'B' propagates to. A new propagation tree containing the new mounts + 'C','C1',.. 'Cn' is created. This propagation tree is identical to the + propagation tree for 'B'. And finally the mount 'C' and its peer group + is made the slave of mount 'Z'. In other words, mount 'C' is in the + state 'slave and shared'. + + 4. 'A' is a unbindable mount and 'B' is a shared mount. This is a + invalid operation. + + 5. 'A' is a private mount and 'B' is a non-shared(private or slave or + unbindable) mount. A new mount 'C' which is clone of 'A', is created. + Its root dentry is 'a'. 'C' is mounted on mount 'B' at dentry 'b'. + + 6. 'A' is a shared mount and 'B' is a non-shared mount. A new mount 'C' + which is a clone of 'A' is created. Its root dentry is 'a'. 'C' is + mounted on mount 'B' at dentry 'b'. 'C' is made a member of the + peer-group of 'A'. + + 7. 'A' is a slave mount of mount 'Z' and 'B' is a non-shared mount. A + new mount 'C' which is a clone of 'A' is created. Its root dentry is + 'a'. 'C' is mounted on mount 'B' at dentry 'b'. Also 'C' is set as a + slave mount of 'Z'. In other words 'A' and 'C' are both slave mounts of + 'Z'. All mount/unmount events on 'Z' propagates to 'A' and 'C'. But + mount/unmount on 'A' do not propagate anywhere else. Similarly + mount/unmount on 'C' do not propagate anywhere else. + + 8. 'A' is a unbindable mount and 'B' is a non-shared mount. This is a + invalid operation. A unbindable mount cannot be bind mounted. + +5c) Rbind semantics + + rbind is same as bind. Bind replicates the specified mount. Rbind + replicates all the mounts in the tree belonging to the specified mount. + Rbind mount is bind mount applied to all the mounts in the tree. + + If the source tree that is rbind has some unbindable mounts, + then the subtree under the unbindable mount is pruned in the new + location. + + eg: let's say we have the following mount tree. + + A + / \ + B C + / \ / \ + D E F G + + Let's say all the mount except the mount C in the tree are + of a type other than unbindable. + + If this tree is rbound to say Z + + We will have the following tree at the new location. + + Z + | + A' + / + B' Note how the tree under C is pruned + / \ in the new location. + D' E' + + + +5d) Move semantics + + Consider the following command + + mount --move A B/b + + where 'A' is the source mount, 'B' is the destination mount and 'b' is + the dentry in the destination mount. + + The outcome depends on the type of the mount of 'A' and 'B'. The table + below is a quick reference. + --------------------------------------------------------------------------- + | MOVE MOUNT OPERATION | + |************************************************************************** + | source(A)->| shared | private | slave | unbindable | + | dest(B) | | | | | + | | | | | | | + | v | | | | | + |************************************************************************** + | shared | shared | shared |shared and slave| invalid | + | | | | | | + |non-shared| shared | private | slave | unbindable | + *************************************************************************** + NOTE: moving a mount residing under a shared mount is invalid. + + Details follow: + + 1. 'A' is a shared mount and 'B' is a shared mount. The mount 'A' is + mounted on mount 'B' at dentry 'b'. Also new mounts 'A1', 'A2'...'An' + are created and mounted at dentry 'b' on all mounts that receive + propagation from mount 'B'. A new propagation tree is created in the + exact same configuration as that of 'B'. This new propagation tree + contains all the new mounts 'A1', 'A2'... 'An'. And this new + propagation tree is appended to the already existing propagation tree + of 'A'. + + 2. 'A' is a private mount and 'B' is a shared mount. The mount 'A' is + mounted on mount 'B' at dentry 'b'. Also new mount 'A1', 'A2'... 'An' + are created and mounted at dentry 'b' on all mounts that receive + propagation from mount 'B'. The mount 'A' becomes a shared mount and a + propagation tree is created which is identical to that of + 'B'. This new propagation tree contains all the new mounts 'A1', + 'A2'... 'An'. + + 3. 'A' is a slave mount of mount 'Z' and 'B' is a shared mount. The + mount 'A' is mounted on mount 'B' at dentry 'b'. Also new mounts 'A1', + 'A2'... 'An' are created and mounted at dentry 'b' on all mounts that + receive propagation from mount 'B'. A new propagation tree is created + in the exact same configuration as that of 'B'. This new propagation + tree contains all the new mounts 'A1', 'A2'... 'An'. And this new + propagation tree is appended to the already existing propagation tree of + 'A'. Mount 'A' continues to be the slave mount of 'Z' but it also + becomes 'shared'. + + 4. 'A' is a unbindable mount and 'B' is a shared mount. The operation + is invalid. Because mounting anything on the shared mount 'B' can + create new mounts that get mounted on the mounts that receive + propagation from 'B'. And since the mount 'A' is unbindable, cloning + it to mount at other mountpoints is not possible. + + 5. 'A' is a private mount and 'B' is a non-shared(private or slave or + unbindable) mount. The mount 'A' is mounted on mount 'B' at dentry 'b'. + + 6. 'A' is a shared mount and 'B' is a non-shared mount. The mount 'A' + is mounted on mount 'B' at dentry 'b'. Mount 'A' continues to be a + shared mount. + + 7. 'A' is a slave mount of mount 'Z' and 'B' is a non-shared mount. + The mount 'A' is mounted on mount 'B' at dentry 'b'. Mount 'A' + continues to be a slave mount of mount 'Z'. + + 8. 'A' is a unbindable mount and 'B' is a non-shared mount. The mount + 'A' is mounted on mount 'B' at dentry 'b'. Mount 'A' continues to be a + unbindable mount. + +5e) Mount semantics + + Consider the following command + + mount device B/b + + 'B' is the destination mount and 'b' is the dentry in the destination + mount. + + The above operation is the same as bind operation with the exception + that the source mount is always a private mount. + + +5f) Unmount semantics + + Consider the following command + + umount A + + where 'A' is a mount mounted on mount 'B' at dentry 'b'. + + If mount 'B' is shared, then all most-recently-mounted mounts at dentry + 'b' on mounts that receive propagation from mount 'B' and does not have + sub-mounts within them are unmounted. + + Example: Let's say 'B1', 'B2', 'B3' are shared mounts that propagate to + each other. + + let's say 'A1', 'A2', 'A3' are first mounted at dentry 'b' on mount + 'B1', 'B2' and 'B3' respectively. + + let's say 'C1', 'C2', 'C3' are next mounted at the same dentry 'b' on + mount 'B1', 'B2' and 'B3' respectively. + + if 'C1' is unmounted, all the mounts that are most-recently-mounted on + 'B1' and on the mounts that 'B1' propagates-to are unmounted. + + 'B1' propagates to 'B2' and 'B3'. And the most recently mounted mount + on 'B2' at dentry 'b' is 'C2', and that of mount 'B3' is 'C3'. + + So all 'C1', 'C2' and 'C3' should be unmounted. + + If any of 'C2' or 'C3' has some child mounts, then that mount is not + unmounted, but all other mounts are unmounted. However if 'C1' is told + to be unmounted and 'C1' has some sub-mounts, the umount operation is + failed entirely. + +5g) Clone Namespace + + A cloned namespace contains all the mounts as that of the parent + namespace. + + Let's say 'A' and 'B' are the corresponding mounts in the parent and the + child namespace. + + If 'A' is shared, then 'B' is also shared and 'A' and 'B' propagate to + each other. + + If 'A' is a slave mount of 'Z', then 'B' is also the slave mount of + 'Z'. + + If 'A' is a private mount, then 'B' is a private mount too. + + If 'A' is unbindable mount, then 'B' is a unbindable mount too. + + +6) Quiz + + A. What is the result of the following command sequence? + + mount --bind /mnt /mnt + mount --make-shared /mnt + mount --bind /mnt /tmp + mount --move /tmp /mnt/1 + + what should be the contents of /mnt /mnt/1 /mnt/1/1 should be? + Should they all be identical? or should /mnt and /mnt/1 be + identical only? + + + B. What is the result of the following command sequence? + + mount --make-rshared / + mkdir -p /v/1 + mount --rbind / /v/1 + + what should be the content of /v/1/v/1 be? + + + C. What is the result of the following command sequence? + + mount --bind /mnt /mnt + mount --make-shared /mnt + mkdir -p /mnt/1/2/3 /mnt/1/test + mount --bind /mnt/1 /tmp + mount --make-slave /mnt + mount --make-shared /mnt + mount --bind /mnt/1/2 /tmp1 + mount --make-slave /mnt + + At this point we have the first mount at /tmp and + its root dentry is 1. Let's call this mount 'A' + And then we have a second mount at /tmp1 with root + dentry 2. Let's call this mount 'B' + Next we have a third mount at /mnt with root dentry + mnt. Let's call this mount 'C' + + 'B' is the slave of 'A' and 'C' is a slave of 'B' + A -> B -> C + + at this point if we execute the following command + + mount --bind /bin /tmp/test + + The mount is attempted on 'A' + + will the mount propagate to 'B' and 'C' ? + + what would be the contents of + /mnt/1/test be? + +7) FAQ + + Q1. Why is bind mount needed? How is it different from symbolic links? + symbolic links can get stale if the destination mount gets + unmounted or moved. Bind mounts continue to exist even if the + other mount is unmounted or moved. + + Q2. Why can't the shared subtree be implemented using exportfs? + + exportfs is a heavyweight way of accomplishing part of what + shared subtree can do. I cannot imagine a way to implement the + semantics of slave mount using exportfs? + + Q3 Why is unbindable mount needed? + + Let's say we want to replicate the mount tree at multiple + locations within the same subtree. + + if one rbind mounts a tree within the same subtree 'n' times + the number of mounts created is an exponential function of 'n'. + Having unbindable mount can help prune the unneeded bind + mounts. Here is an example. + + step 1: + let's say the root tree has just two directories with + one vfsmount. + root + / \ + tmp usr + + And we want to replicate the tree at multiple + mountpoints under /root/tmp + + step2: + mount --make-shared /root + + mkdir -p /tmp/m1 + + mount --rbind /root /tmp/m1 + + the new tree now looks like this: + + root + / \ + tmp usr + / + m1 + / \ + tmp usr + / + m1 + + it has two vfsmounts + + step3: + mkdir -p /tmp/m2 + mount --rbind /root /tmp/m2 + + the new tree now looks like this: + + root + / \ + tmp usr + / \ + m1 m2 + / \ / \ + tmp usr tmp usr + / \ / + m1 m2 m1 + / \ / \ + tmp usr tmp usr + / / \ + m1 m1 m2 + / \ + tmp usr + / \ + m1 m2 + + it has 6 vfsmounts + + step 4: + mkdir -p /tmp/m3 + mount --rbind /root /tmp/m3 + + I won't draw the tree..but it has 24 vfsmounts + + + at step i the number of vfsmounts is V[i] = i*V[i-1]. + This is an exponential function. And this tree has way more + mounts than what we really needed in the first place. + + One could use a series of umount at each step to prune + out the unneeded mounts. But there is a better solution. + Unclonable mounts come in handy here. + + step 1: + let's say the root tree has just two directories with + one vfsmount. + root + / \ + tmp usr + + How do we set up the same tree at multiple locations under + /root/tmp + + step2: + mount --bind /root/tmp /root/tmp + + mount --make-rshared /root + mount --make-unbindable /root/tmp + + mkdir -p /tmp/m1 + + mount --rbind /root /tmp/m1 + + the new tree now looks like this: + + root + / \ + tmp usr + / + m1 + / \ + tmp usr + + step3: + mkdir -p /tmp/m2 + mount --rbind /root /tmp/m2 + + the new tree now looks like this: + + root + / \ + tmp usr + / \ + m1 m2 + / \ / \ + tmp usr tmp usr + + step4: + + mkdir -p /tmp/m3 + mount --rbind /root /tmp/m3 + + the new tree now looks like this: + + root + / \ + tmp usr + / \ \ + m1 m2 m3 + / \ / \ / \ + tmp usr tmp usr tmp usr + +8) Implementation + +8A) Datastructure + + 4 new fields are introduced to struct vfsmount + ->mnt_share + ->mnt_slave_list + ->mnt_slave + ->mnt_master + + ->mnt_share links together all the mount to/from which this vfsmount + send/receives propagation events. + + ->mnt_slave_list links all the mounts to which this vfsmount propagates + to. + + ->mnt_slave links together all the slaves that its master vfsmount + propagates to. + + ->mnt_master points to the master vfsmount from which this vfsmount + receives propagation. + + ->mnt_flags takes two more flags to indicate the propagation status of + the vfsmount. MNT_SHARE indicates that the vfsmount is a shared + vfsmount. MNT_UNCLONABLE indicates that the vfsmount cannot be + replicated. + + All the shared vfsmounts in a peer group form a cyclic list through + ->mnt_share. + + All vfsmounts with the same ->mnt_master form on a cyclic list anchored + in ->mnt_master->mnt_slave_list and going through ->mnt_slave. + + ->mnt_master can point to arbitrary (and possibly different) members + of master peer group. To find all immediate slaves of a peer group + you need to go through _all_ ->mnt_slave_list of its members. + Conceptually it's just a single set - distribution among the + individual lists does not affect propagation or the way propagation + tree is modified by operations. + + All vfsmounts in a peer group have the same ->mnt_master. If it is + non-NULL, they form a contiguous (ordered) segment of slave list. + + A example propagation tree looks as shown in the figure below. + [ NOTE: Though it looks like a forest, if we consider all the shared + mounts as a conceptual entity called 'pnode', it becomes a tree] + + + A <--> B <--> C <---> D + /|\ /| |\ + / F G J K H I + / + E<-->K + /|\ + M L N + + In the above figure A,B,C and D all are shared and propagate to each + other. 'A' has got 3 slave mounts 'E' 'F' and 'G' 'C' has got 2 slave + mounts 'J' and 'K' and 'D' has got two slave mounts 'H' and 'I'. + 'E' is also shared with 'K' and they propagate to each other. And + 'K' has 3 slaves 'M', 'L' and 'N' + + A's ->mnt_share links with the ->mnt_share of 'B' 'C' and 'D' + + A's ->mnt_slave_list links with ->mnt_slave of 'E', 'K', 'F' and 'G' + + E's ->mnt_share links with ->mnt_share of K + 'E', 'K', 'F', 'G' have their ->mnt_master point to struct + vfsmount of 'A' + 'M', 'L', 'N' have their ->mnt_master point to struct vfsmount of 'K' + K's ->mnt_slave_list links with ->mnt_slave of 'M', 'L' and 'N' + + C's ->mnt_slave_list links with ->mnt_slave of 'J' and 'K' + J and K's ->mnt_master points to struct vfsmount of C + and finally D's ->mnt_slave_list links with ->mnt_slave of 'H' and 'I' + 'H' and 'I' have their ->mnt_master pointing to struct vfsmount of 'D'. + + + NOTE: The propagation tree is orthogonal to the mount tree. + +8B Locking: + + ->mnt_share, ->mnt_slave, ->mnt_slave_list, ->mnt_master are protected + by namespace_sem (exclusive for modifications, shared for reading). + + Normally we have ->mnt_flags modifications serialized by vfsmount_lock. + There are two exceptions: do_add_mount() and clone_mnt(). + The former modifies a vfsmount that has not been visible in any shared + data structures yet. + The latter holds namespace_sem and the only references to vfsmount + are in lists that can't be traversed without namespace_sem. + +8C Algorithm: + + The crux of the implementation resides in rbind/move operation. + + The overall algorithm breaks the operation into 3 phases: (look at + attach_recursive_mnt() and propagate_mnt()) + + 1. prepare phase. + 2. commit phases. + 3. abort phases. + + Prepare phase: + + for each mount in the source tree: + a) Create the necessary number of mount trees to + be attached to each of the mounts that receive + propagation from the destination mount. + b) Do not attach any of the trees to its destination. + However note down its ->mnt_parent and ->mnt_mountpoint + c) Link all the new mounts to form a propagation tree that + is identical to the propagation tree of the destination + mount. + + If this phase is successful, there should be 'n' new + propagation trees; where 'n' is the number of mounts in the + source tree. Go to the commit phase + + Also there should be 'm' new mount trees, where 'm' is + the number of mounts to which the destination mount + propagates to. + + if any memory allocations fail, go to the abort phase. + + Commit phase + attach each of the mount trees to their corresponding + destination mounts. + + Abort phase + delete all the newly created trees. + + NOTE: all the propagation related functionality resides in the file + pnode.c + + +------------------------------------------------------------------------ + +version 0.1 (created the initial document, Ram Pai linuxram@us.ibm.com) +version 0.2 (Incorporated comments from Al Viro) |