mount_namespaces

Note the following points with respect to mount namespaces:

• Each mount namespace has an owner user namespace. As explained above, when a new mount namespace is created, its mount point list is initialized as a copy of the mount point list of another mount namespace. If the new namespace and the namespace from which the mount point list was copied are owned by different user namespaces, then the new mount namespace is considered less privileged.
• When creating a less privileged mount namespace, shared mounts are reduced to slave mounts. (Shared and slave mounts are discussed below.) This ensures that mappings performed in less privileged mount namespaces will not propagate to more privileged mount namespaces.
• Mounts that come as a single unit from more privileged mount are locked together and may not be separated in a less privileged mount namespace. (The unshare(2) CLONE_NEWNS operation brings across all of the mounts from the original mount namespace as a single unit, and recursive mounts that propagate between mount namespaces propagate as a single unit.)
• The mount(2) flags MS_RDONLY, MS_NOSUID, MS_NOEXEC, and the "atime" flags (MS_NOATIME, MS_NODIRATIME, MS_RELATIME) settings become locked when propagated from a more privileged to a less privileged mount namespace, and may not be changed in the less privileged mount namespace.

• A file or directory that is a mount point in one namespace that is not a mount point in another namespace, may be renamed, unlinked, or removed (rmdir(2)) in the mount namespace in which it is not a mount point (subject to the usual permission checks). Consequently, the mount point is removed in the mount namespace where it was a mount point.

  Previously (before Linux 3.18), attempting to unlink, rename, or remove a file or directory that was a mount point in another mount namespace would result in the error EBUSY. That behavior had technical problems of enforcement (e.g., for NFS) and permitted denial-of-service attacks against more privileged users. (i.e., preventing individual files from being updated by bind mounting on top of them).

Suppose that on a terminal in the initial mount namespace, we mark one mount point as shared and another as private, and then view the mounts in /proc/self/mountinfo:

sh1# mount --make-shared /mntS
sh1# mount --make-private /mntP
sh1# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | grep '/mnt' | sed 's/ - .*//'
77 61 8:17 / /mntS rw,relatime shared:1
83 61 8:15 / /mntP rw,relatime

From the /proc/self/mountinfo output, we see that /mntS is a shared mount in peer group 1, and that /mntP has no optional tags, indicating that it is a private mount. The first two fields in each record in this file are the unique ID for this mount, and the mount ID of the parent mount. We can further inspect this file to see that the parent mount point of /mntS and /mntP is the root directory, /, which is mounted as private:

sh1# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | awk '$1 == 61' | sed 's/ - .*//'
61 0 8:2 / / rw,relatime

On a second terminal, we create a new mount namespace where we run a second shell and inspect the mounts:

$ PS1='sh2# ' sudo unshare -m --propagation unchanged sh
sh2# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | grep '/mnt' | sed 's/ - .*//'
222 145 8:17 / /mntS rw,relatime shared:1
225 145 8:15 / /mntP rw,relatime

The new mount namespace received a copy of the initial mount namespace's mount points. These new mount points maintain the same propagation types, but have unique mount IDs. (The --propagation unchanged option prevents unshare(1) from marking all mounts as private when creating a new mount namespace, which it does by default.)

In the second terminal, we then create submounts under each of /mntS and /mntP and inspect the set-up:

sh2# mkdir /mntS/a
sh2# mount /dev/sdb6 /mntS/a
sh2# mkdir /mntP/b
sh2# mount /dev/sdb7 /mntP/b
sh2# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | grep '/mnt' | sed 's/ - .*//'
222 145 8:17 / /mntS rw,relatime shared:1
225 145 8:15 / /mntP rw,relatime
178 222 8:22 / /mntS/a rw,relatime shared:2
230 225 8:23 / /mntP/b rw,relatime

From the above, it can be seen that /mntS/a was created as shared (inheriting this setting from its parent mount) and /mntP/b was created as a private mount.

Returning to the first terminal and inspecting the set-up, we see that the new mount created under the shared mount point /mntS propagated to its peer mount (in the initial mount namespace), but the new mount created under the private mount point /mntP did not propagate:

sh1# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | grep '/mnt' | sed 's/ - .*//'
77 61 8:17 / /mntS rw,relatime shared:1
83 61 8:15 / /mntP rw,relatime
179 77 8:22 / /mntS/a rw,relatime shared:2

Making a mount point a slave allows it to receive propagated mount and unmount events from a master shared peer group, while preventing it from propagating events to that master. This is useful if we want to (say) receive a mount event when an optical disk is mounted in the master shared peer group (in another mount namespace), but want to prevent mount and unmount events under the slave mount from having side effects in other namespaces.

We can demonstrate the effect of slaving by first marking two mount points as shared in the initial mount namespace:

sh1# mount --make-shared /mntX
sh1# mount --make-shared /mntY
sh1# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | grep '/mnt' | sed 's/ - .*//'
132 83 8:23 / /mntX rw,relatime shared:1
133 83 8:22 / /mntY rw,relatime shared:2

On a second terminal, we create a new mount namespace and inspect the mount points:

sh2# unshare -m --propagation unchanged sh
sh2# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | grep '/mnt' | sed 's/ - .*//'
168 167 8:23 / /mntX rw,relatime shared:1
169 167 8:22 / /mntY rw,relatime shared:2

In the new mount namespace, we then mark one of the mount points as a slave:

sh2# mount --make-slave /mntY
sh2# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | grep '/mnt' | sed 's/ - .*//'
168 167 8:23 / /mntX rw,relatime shared:1
169 167 8:22 / /mntY rw,relatime master:2

From the above output, we see that /mntY is now a slave mount that is receiving propagation events from the shared peer group with the ID 2.

Continuing in the new namespace, we create submounts under each of /mntX and /mntY:

sh2# mkdir /mntX/a
sh2# mount /dev/sda3 /mntX/a
sh2# mkdir /mntY/b
sh2# mount /dev/sda5 /mntY/b

When we inspect the state of the mount points in the new mount namespace, we see that /mntX/a was created as a new shared mount (inheriting the "shared" setting from its parent mount) and /mntY/b was created as a private mount:

sh2# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | grep '/mnt' | sed 's/ - .*//'
168 167 8:23 / /mntX rw,relatime shared:1
169 167 8:22 / /mntY rw,relatime master:2
173 168 8:3 / /mntX/a rw,relatime shared:3
175 169 8:5 / /mntY/b rw,relatime

Returning to the first terminal (in the initial mount namespace), we see that the mount /mntX/a propagated to the peer (the shared /mntX), but the mount /mntY/b was not propagated:

sh1# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | grep '/mnt' | sed 's/ - .*//'
132 83 8:23 / /mntX rw,relatime shared:1
133 83 8:22 / /mntY rw,relatime shared:2
174 132 8:3 / /mntX/a rw,relatime shared:3

Now we create a new mount point under /mntY in the first shell:

sh1# mkdir /mntY/c
sh1# mount /dev/sda1 /mntY/c
sh1# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | grep '/mnt' | sed 's/ - .*//'
132 83 8:23 / /mntX rw,relatime shared:1
133 83 8:22 / /mntY rw,relatime shared:2
174 132 8:3 / /mntX/a rw,relatime shared:3
178 133 8:1 / /mntY/c rw,relatime shared:4

When we examine the mount points in the second mount namespace, we see that in this case the new mount has been propagated to the slave mount point, and that the new mount is itself a slave mount (to peer group 4):

sh2# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | grep '/mnt' | sed 's/ - .*//'
168 167 8:23 / /mntX rw,relatime shared:1
169 167 8:22 / /mntY rw,relatime master:2
173 168 8:3 / /mntX/a rw,relatime shared:3
175 169 8:5 / /mntY/b rw,relatime
179 169 8:1 / /mntY/c rw,relatime master:4

One of the primary purposes of unbindable mounts is to avoid the "mount point explosion" problem when repeatedly performing bind mounts of a higher-level subtree at a lower-level mount point. The problem is illustrated by the following shell session.

Suppose we have a system with the following mount points:

# mount | awk '{print $1, $2, $3}'
/dev/sda1 on /
/dev/sdb6 on /mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /mntY

Suppose furthermore that we wish to recursively bind mount the root directory under several users' home directories. We do this for the first user, and inspect the mount points:

# mount --rbind / /home/cecilia/
# mount | awk '{print $1, $2, $3}'
/dev/sda1 on /
/dev/sdb6 on /mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /mntY
/dev/sda1 on /home/cecilia
/dev/sdb6 on /home/cecilia/mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /home/cecilia/mntY

When we repeat this operation for the second user, we start to see the explosion problem:

# mount --rbind / /home/henry
# mount | awk '{print $1, $2, $3}'
/dev/sda1 on /
/dev/sdb6 on /mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /mntY
/dev/sda1 on /home/cecilia
/dev/sdb6 on /home/cecilia/mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /home/cecilia/mntY
/dev/sda1 on /home/henry
/dev/sdb6 on /home/henry/mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /home/henry/mntY
/dev/sda1 on /home/henry/home/cecilia
/dev/sdb6 on /home/henry/home/cecilia/mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /home/henry/home/cecilia/mntY

Under /home/henry, we have not only recursively added the /mntX and /mntY mounts, but also the recursive mounts of those directories under /home/cecilia that were created in the previous step. Upon repeating the step for a third user, it becomes obvious that the explosion is exponential in nature:

# mount --rbind / /home/otto
# mount | awk '{print $1, $2, $3}'
/dev/sda1 on /
/dev/sdb6 on /mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /mntY
/dev/sda1 on /home/cecilia
/dev/sdb6 on /home/cecilia/mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /home/cecilia/mntY
/dev/sda1 on /home/henry
/dev/sdb6 on /home/henry/mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /home/henry/mntY
/dev/sda1 on /home/henry/home/cecilia
/dev/sdb6 on /home/henry/home/cecilia/mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /home/henry/home/cecilia/mntY
/dev/sda1 on /home/otto
/dev/sdb6 on /home/otto/mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /home/otto/mntY
/dev/sda1 on /home/otto/home/cecilia
/dev/sdb6 on /home/otto/home/cecilia/mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /home/otto/home/cecilia/mntY
/dev/sda1 on /home/otto/home/henry
/dev/sdb6 on /home/otto/home/henry/mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /home/otto/home/henry/mntY
/dev/sda1 on /home/otto/home/henry/home/cecilia
/dev/sdb6 on /home/otto/home/henry/home/cecilia/mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /home/otto/home/henry/home/cecilia/mntY

The mount explosion problem in the above scenario can be avoided by making each of the new mounts unbindable. The effect of doing this is that recursive mounts of the root directory will not replicate the unbindable mounts. We make such a mount for the first user:

# mount --rbind --make-unbindable / /home/cecilia

Before going further, we show that unbindable mounts are indeed unbindable:

# mkdir /mntZ
# mount --bind /home/cecilia /mntZ
mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /home/cecilia,
       missing codepage or helper program, or other error

       In some cases useful info is found in syslog - try
       dmesg | tail or so.

Now we create unbindable recursive bind mounts for the other two users:

# mount --rbind --make-unbindable / /home/henry
# mount --rbind --make-unbindable / /home/otto

Upon examining the list of mount points, we see there has been no explosion of mount points, because the unbindable mounts were not replicated under each user's directory:

# mount | awk '{print $1, $2, $3}'
/dev/sda1 on /
/dev/sdb6 on /mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /mntY
/dev/sda1 on /home/cecilia
/dev/sdb6 on /home/cecilia/mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /home/cecilia/mntY
/dev/sda1 on /home/henry
/dev/sdb6 on /home/henry/mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /home/henry/mntY
/dev/sda1 on /home/otto
/dev/sdb6 on /home/otto/mntX
/dev/sdb7 on /home/otto/mntY

The following table shows the effect that applying a new propagation type (i.e., mount --make-xxxx) has on the existing propagation type of a mount point. The rows correspond to existing propagation types, and the columns are the new propagation settings. For reasons of space, "private" is abbreviated as "priv" and "unbindable" as "unbind".

Note the following details to the table:

[1]

If a shared mount is the only mount in its peer group, making it a slave automatically makes it private.

[2]

Slaving a nonshared mount has no effect on the mount.

Suppose that the following command is performed:

mount --bind A/a B/b

Here, A is the source mount point, B is the destination mount point, a is a subdirectory path under the mount point A, and b is a subdirectory path under the mount point B. The propagation type of the resulting mount, B/b, depends on the propagation types of the mount points A and B, and is summarized in the following table.

Note that a recursive bind of a subtree follows the same semantics as for a bind operation on each mount in the subtree. (Unbindable mounts are automatically pruned at the target mount point.)

For further details, see Documentation/filesystems/sharedsubtree.txt in the kernel source tree.

Suppose that the following command is performed:

mount --move A B/b

Here, A is the source mount point, B is the destination mount point, and b is a subdirectory path under the mount point B. The propagation type of the resulting mount, B/b, depends on the propagation types of the mount points A and B, and is summarized in the following table.

Note: moving a mount that resides under a shared mount is invalid.

For further details, see Documentation/filesystems/sharedsubtree.txt in the kernel source tree.

Suppose that we use the following command to create a mount point:

mount device B/b

Here, B is the destination mount point, and b is a subdirectory path under the mount point B. The propagation type of the resulting mount, B/b, follows the same rules as for a bind mount, where the propagation type of the source mount is considered always to be private.

Suppose that we use the following command to tear down a mount point:

unmount A

Here, A is a mount point on B/b, where B is the parent mount and b is a subdirectory path under the mount point B. If B is shared, then all most-recently-mounted mounts at b on mounts that receive propagation from mount B and do not have submounts under them are unmounted.

The propagate_from:X tag is shown in the optional fields of a /proc/[pid]/mountinfo record in cases where a process can't see a slave's immediate master (i.e., the pathname of the master is not reachable from the filesystem root directory) and so cannot determine the chain of propagation between the mounts it can see.

In the following example, we first create a two-link master-slave chain between the mounts /mnt, /tmp/etc, and /mnt/tmp/etc. Then the chroot(1) command is used to make the /tmp/etc mount point unreachable from the root directory, creating a situation where the master of /mnt/tmp/etc is not reachable from the (new) root directory of the process.

First, we bind mount the root directory onto /mnt and then bind mount /proc at /mnt/proc so that after the later chroot(1) the proc(5) filesystem remains visible at the correct location in the chroot-ed environment.

# mkdir -p /mnt/proc
# mount --bind / /mnt
# mount --bind /proc /mnt/proc

Next, we ensure that the /mnt mount is a shared mount in a new peer group (with no peers):

# mount --make-private /mnt  # Isolate from any previous peer group
# mount --make-shared /mnt
# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | grep '/mnt' | sed 's/ - .*//'
239 61 8:2 / /mnt ... shared:102
248 239 0:4 / /mnt/proc ... shared:5

Next, we bind mount /mnt/etc onto /tmp/etc:

# mkdir -p /tmp/etc
# mount --bind /mnt/etc /tmp/etc
# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | egrep '/mnt|/tmp/' | sed 's/ - .*//'
239 61 8:2 / /mnt ... shared:102
248 239 0:4 / /mnt/proc ... shared:5
267 40 8:2 /etc /tmp/etc ... shared:102

Initially, these two mount points are in the same peer group, but we then make the /tmp/etc a slave of /mnt/etc, and then make /tmp/etc shared as well, so that it can propagate events to the next slave in the chain:

# mount --make-slave /tmp/etc
# mount --make-shared /tmp/etc
# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | egrep '/mnt|/tmp/' | sed 's/ - .*//'
239 61 8:2 / /mnt ... shared:102
248 239 0:4 / /mnt/proc ... shared:5
267 40 8:2 /etc /tmp/etc ... shared:105 master:102

Then we bind mount /tmp/etc onto /mnt/tmp/etc. Again, the two mount points are initially in the same peer group, but we then make /mnt/tmp/etc a slave of /tmp/etc:

# mkdir -p /mnt/tmp/etc
# mount --bind /tmp/etc /mnt/tmp/etc
# mount --make-slave /mnt/tmp/etc
# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | egrep '/mnt|/tmp/' | sed 's/ - .*//'
239 61 8:2 / /mnt ... shared:102
248 239 0:4 / /mnt/proc ... shared:5
267 40 8:2 /etc /tmp/etc ... shared:105 master:102
273 239 8:2 /etc /mnt/tmp/etc ... master:105

From the above, we see that /mnt is the master of the slave /tmp/etc, which in turn is the master of the slave /mnt/tmp/etc.

We then chroot(1) to the /mnt directory, which renders the mount with ID 267 unreachable from the (new) root directory:

# chroot /mnt

When we examine the state of the mounts inside the chroot-ed environment, we see the following:

# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | sed 's/ - .*//'
239 61 8:2 / / ... shared:102
248 239 0:4 / /proc ... shared:5
273 239 8:2 /etc /tmp/etc ... master:105 propagate_from:102

Above, we see that the mount with ID 273 is a slave whose master is the peer group 105. The mount point for that master is unreachable, and so a propagate_from tag is displayed, indicating that the closest dominant peer group (i.e., the nearest reachable mount in the slave chain) is the peer group with the ID 102 (corresponding to the /mnt mount point before the chroot(1) was performed.