Re: [ANNOUNCE] submount: another removeable media handler

[H. Peter Anvin]

Followup to:  <[e-mail]>
By author:    Eugene Weiss <[e-mail]>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> 
> > how is it different from what automounter does?
> 
> Autofs works by creating a special filesystem above the vfs layer, and passing 
> requests and data back and forth.   Submount actually does much less than 
> this- it puts a special filesystem underneath the real one, and the only 
> things it returns to the VFS layer are error messages.  It handles no IO 
> operations whatsoever.
> 
> Peter Anvin has called using the automounter for removeable media "abuse."
> Submount is designed for it.
> 

Sure, but it's not clear to me that you have listened to me saying
*why* it is abuse.

Basically, in my opinion removable media should be handled by insert
and removal detection, not by access detection.  Obviously, there are
some sticky issues with that in the case where media can be removed
without notice (like PC floppies or other manual-eject devices), but
overall I think that is the correct approach.

	-hpa
-- 
<[e-mail]> at work, <[e-mail]> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
Architectures needed: ia64 m68k mips64 ppc ppc64 s390 s390x sh v850 x86-64