Re: mount(2) and properties

[David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 08:00:17PM +0000, Christos Zoulas wrote:
 >> Add a new system call or version mount(). pmount?
 > 
 > I think that the flag is good enough. New binaries that run on the old
 > system will just fail with EINVAL.

I'm not entirely sure. I think in the long run it would probably be
desirable for VOP_MOUNT to always send a plist to the FS. Which means
for compat with old mount binaries there'll need to be translation
code, which we *don't* want in every FS but only in compat_50 or
whatever. And for that i think we want the syscall versioned.

Although I guess that should also wait until we're ready to switch all
FSes over, which should not happen until after 5.0 is branched, and in
the meantime a flag is probably the right thing.

(hrm. This ought to make it possible to move the dozen or so copies of
the code to open a block device above the vfs interface, because we
can check to see if the plist contains a device pathname and do the
lookup right away...)

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost