All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
	overlayfs <linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ovl: return error on mount if metacopy cannot be enabled
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 15:56:43 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181031195643.GA3382@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181031192341.GA3093@redhat.com>

On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 03:23:41PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 08:37:04PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 6:39 PM Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > ...
> > > >
> > > > Yes, but keep in mind that strict=off will NOT be applied to stable
> > > > v4.19.y *unless* a real user really reports a bug, a-priori, we assume
> > > > that implicit metacopy=on => redirect_dir=on,strict=on is sufficient
> > > > to solve the bug, so it is sufficient for stable.
> > >
> > > Did not understand this. So strict=on will be in stable or not? I mean,
> > > all the behavior strict=on enforces will be in 4.19 or not.
> > >
> > > If it is not, then it will become backward compatibility issue by the
> > > time 4.20 releases.
> > >
> > > If strict=on is not part of 4.19 stable, then you can't switch it
> > > on in 4.20.
> > >
> > > What am I missing.
> > >
> > 
> > I guess I haven't thought this through. Let's see:
> > 
> > 1.a. In 4.19, specifying metacopy=on will result in metacopy=on
> > OR -EINVAL (a.k.a. "the bug fix") [*]
> > 
> > 1.b. In 4.19, user will not be able to mount with metacopy=on with
> > an upper fs that does not support xattr/d_type/RENAME_WHITEOUT.
> 
> Ok, so metacopy will trigger strict=on internally. And that in-turn
> will trigger all the checks on upper fs (xattr/d_type/RENAME_WHITEOUT).
> 
> > 
> > 1.d. In 4.19, mount will fail if given mount option metacopy=on and
> > nfs_export is enabled (even if enabled by default) or if redirect_dir
> > is disabled (even if disabled by default).
> 
> Ok, so no automatic enable/disable of redirect_dir/nfs_export options.
> 
> > 
> > 1.d. In 4.19, mount will fail if given mount option metacopy=on,
> > index is enabled (even if enabled by default) and underlying fs does
> > not support file handles.
> 
> Ok, so index might be enabled by default but we will not disable it
> because metacopy=on has triggered strict behavior.

Hi Amir,

Thinking more about it. What does strict=on mean for default behavior
of a knob (configured using module param or Kconfig). Will it mean
that default value of knob can't be changed either (disabled if need be).

IOW, strict=on will mean that all values of options will be static
and can't be changed. It does not matter where these came from.
(Override ordering between Kconfig/module/mount option will still be
there).

If that's the case, then metacopy=on (hence strict=on) and auto enabling
of redirect_dir are contradictory. Given strict is on, we are not supposed
to change the default value as it came from Kconfig/module?

Similarly, we can't disable nfs_export if metacopy=on. 

IOW, If we limit "strict=on" to values passed as part of mount options,
then it will allow to change default values of other options as needed.
But if "strict=on" means default values can't be changed, then auto
enabling/disabling of redirect_dir/nfs_export is not possible?

Thanks
Vivek

  reply	other threads:[~2018-10-31 19:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-10-31 11:10 [PATCH v2] ovl: return error on mount if metacopy cannot be enabled Amir Goldstein
2018-10-31 11:48 ` Miklos Szeredi
2018-10-31 12:19   ` Miklos Szeredi
2018-10-31 12:26     ` Amir Goldstein
2018-10-31 12:35       ` Miklos Szeredi
2018-10-31 12:37         ` Miklos Szeredi
2018-10-31 13:42           ` Amir Goldstein
2018-10-31 14:05         ` Vivek Goyal
2018-10-31 13:29   ` Amir Goldstein
2018-10-31 13:47     ` Vivek Goyal
2018-10-31 14:05       ` Amir Goldstein
2018-10-31 14:17         ` Vivek Goyal
2018-10-31 15:31           ` Amir Goldstein
2018-10-31 15:39             ` Vivek Goyal
2018-10-31 16:04               ` Amir Goldstein
2018-10-31 16:39                 ` Vivek Goyal
2018-10-31 18:37                   ` Amir Goldstein
2018-10-31 19:23                     ` Vivek Goyal
2018-10-31 19:56                       ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2018-10-31 20:24                         ` Amir Goldstein
2018-10-31 21:24                           ` Vivek Goyal
2018-10-31 22:16                             ` Amir Goldstein

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20181031195643.GA3382@redhat.com \
    --to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.