Re: overlayfs regression

[Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 08:19:43AM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 07:24:24PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 6:35 PM Christian Brauner
> > <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 06:25:55PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 5:48 PM Christian Brauner
> > > > <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hey Miklosz,
> > > > > hey Amir,
> > > > >
> > > > > We've been observing regressions in our containers test-suite with
> > > > > commit:
> > > > >
> > > > > Author: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
> > > > > Date:   Tue Mar 17 15:04:22 2020 +0100
> > > > >
> > > > >     ovl: separate detection of remote upper layer from stacked overlay
> > > > >
> > > > >     Following patch will allow remote as upper layer, but not overlay stacked
> > > > >     on upper layer.  Separate the two concepts.
> > > > >
> > > > >     This patch is doesn't change behavior.
> > > > >
> > > > >     Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Are you sure this is the offending commit?
> > > > Look at it. It is really moving a bit of code around and should not
> > > > change logic.
> > > > There are several other commits in 5.7 that could have gone wrong...
> > >
> > > Yeah, most likely. I can do a bisect but it might take a little until I
> > > get around to it. Is that ok?
> > >
> > 
> > ok.
> > I thought you pointed to a commit that you bisected the regression to.
> > I guess not.
> 
> I think this is only an Ubuntu problem, it looks like someone did some
> bad conflict resoluation when rebasing a sauce patch onto 5.7.

Yeah, I just saw this as well.

Sorry for the noise.
Christian