From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linux.org.uk header.i=@linux.org.uk header.b="FVdgV6gn" Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk (zeniv.linux.org.uk [IPv6:2a03:a000:7:0:5054:ff:fe1c:15ff]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17B90D8; Sat, 18 Nov 2023 13:17:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.org.uk; s=zeniv-20220401; h=Sender:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=+R63ZDAkt//s8UnKB88tVCQVVkQg+YIsVGTYrM8JVJo=; b=FVdgV6gnhRPhSD4xJjKV+YTszY 44JDYnnMV9+2mOcMiQQoNlzEstszYtRe1p2LsJ0yXqJ0aQJktGwE0wiL5t4vr6NgeRCPxAUur/Cl5 k4Px/hV24qnLgUqqEVFNatVVgeJnejxtllhC6Pu9pPb9tBR4Xg1Sy0/FjB2xklDqS+6pZ+YGhyBJD /Xq+3I29gjw0MZkzpGn0/LULOKcq6nNo3IfFNUsYOnwcKx/F//H09OQkR3sinycIavhdEZakrlmQM UzzU9XeIp5v2acvVzkeTqCZRk7q4enCOUUaZsJWi8yyznrRjZW7nB+aWE52Wg3j2QSMePb73IhgDo ++KcaHhA==; Received: from viro by zeniv.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.96 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1r4Sh3-00HaNN-2Y; Sat, 18 Nov 2023 21:17:33 +0000 Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2023 21:17:33 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Amir Goldstein Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org, Miklos Szeredi Subject: Re: [RFC][overlayfs] do we still need d_instantiate_anon() and export of d_alloc_anon()? Message-ID: <20231118211733.GG1957730@ZenIV> References: <20231111080400.GO1957730@ZenIV> <20231111185034.GP1957730@ZenIV> <20231118200247.GF1957730@ZenIV> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20231118200247.GF1957730@ZenIV> Sender: Al Viro On Sat, Nov 18, 2023 at 08:02:47PM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > On Sun, Nov 12, 2023 at 09:26:28AM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > > Tested the patch below. > > If you want to apply it as part of dcache cleanup, it's fine by me. > > Otherwise, I will queue it for the next overlayfs update. > > OK... Let's do it that way - overlayfs part goes into never-rebased branch > (no matter which tree), pulled into dcache series and into your overlayfs > update, with removal of unused stuff done in a separate patch in dcache > series. > > That way we won't step on each other's toes when reordering, etc. > Does that work for you? I can put the overlayfs part into #no-rebase-overlayfs > in vfs.git, or you could do it in a v6.7-rc1-based branch in your tree - > whatever's more convenient for you. See #no-rebase-overlayfs.