From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sa-dev@rainbow.by,
andre.roth@roche.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ovl: allow distributed fs as lower layer
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2015 01:07:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150605000715.GP7232@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1433424586-7771-3-git-send-email-miklos@szeredi.hu>
On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 03:29:46PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> From: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
>
> Allow filesystems with .d_revalidate as lower layer(s), but not as upper
> layer.
>
> For local filesystems the rule was that modifications on the layers
> directly while being part of the overlay results in undefined behavior.
>
> This can easily be extended to distributed filesystems: we assume the tree
> used as lower layer is static, which means ->d_revalidate() should always
> return "1". If that is not the case, return -ESTALE, don't try to work
> around the modification.
Umm... Cosmetical point is that this
> +static bool ovl_remote(struct dentry *root)
> +{
> + const struct dentry_operations *dop = root->d_op;
> +
> + return dop && (dop->d_revalidate || dop->d_weak_revalidate);
> +}
is better done as
root->d_flags & (DCACHE_OP_REVALIDATE | DCACHE_OP_WEAK_REVALIDATE)
More interesting question is whether anything in the system relies on
existing behaviour that follows ->d_revalidate() returning 0. Have you
tried to mount e.g. procfs as underlying layer and torture it for a while?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-05 0:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-04 13:29 [PATCH 0/2] ovl: support NFS as lower layer Miklos Szeredi
2015-06-04 13:29 ` [PATCH 1/2] ovl: don't traverse automount points Miklos Szeredi
2015-06-04 13:29 ` [PATCH 2/2] ovl: allow distributed fs as lower layer Miklos Szeredi
2015-06-05 0:07 ` Al Viro [this message]
2015-06-05 15:37 ` Miklos Szeredi
2015-06-07 1:02 ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-06-09 12:44 ` Miklos Szeredi
2015-06-09 12:54 ` Eric W. Biederman
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=20150605000715.GP7232@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=andre.roth@roche.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=sa-dev@rainbow.by \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).