From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com (client-ip=134.134.136.65; helo=mga03.intel.com; envelope-from=terry.s.duncan@linux.intel.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46Cq456m63zDr9L for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 10:56:36 +1000 (AEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Aug 2019 17:56:33 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,410,1559545200"; d="scan'208";a="169258830" Received: from tsduncan-ubuntu.jf.intel.com (HELO [10.7.169.130]) ([10.7.169.130]) by orsmga007-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 20 Aug 2019 17:56:33 -0700 Subject: Re: Alternative to the filesystem overlay To: "Alexander A. Filippov" , openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org References: <20190816090955.GA15986@bbwork.lan> From: Terry Duncan Message-ID: <791b2ada-c35d-c394-b7f0-fd3f92abeed2@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:56:32 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190816090955.GA15986@bbwork.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 00:56:39 -0000 On 8/16/19 2:09 AM, Alexander A. Filippov wrote: > Most of these issues can be solved by the simple shell scripts. We could modify > the initramfs/init scenario to exec these scripts at the moment when ROFS and > RWFS have mounted but are not combined to OVERLAY yet. > > Of course, this method doesn't prevent an occurrence of any new issues of this > type but brings an easy way to solve them. > > -- > Regards, > Alexander > Possibly the overlay FS is not expecting and does not support the ROFS to change as it does when a new build adds a file to an existing directory. When this occurs an overlayed file in the same directory could cause corruption in the directory. Are you suggesting scripts that detect a change to the underlying FS and attempt to patch the overlay? Thanks, Terry