From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mfb01-md.ns.itscom.net ([175.177.155.109]:54240 "EHLO mfb01-md.ns.itscom.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753571AbeDYOzj (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:55:39 -0400 Received: from mail04-md.ns.itscom.net (mail04-md.ns.itscom.net [175.177.155.114]) by mfb01-md.ns.itscom.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEDEC328885 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2018 23:49:51 +0900 (JST) From: "J. R. Okajima" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/35] overlayfs: stack file operations To: Miklos Szeredi Cc: linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20180412150826.20988-1-mszeredi@redhat.com> References: <20180412150826.20988-1-mszeredi@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 23:49:49 +0900 Message-ID: <5342.1524667789@jrobl> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Miklos Szeredi: > This patch series reverts the VFS hacks (with the exception of d_path) and I totally agree with removing d_real things. It must be good to the world. If I understand correctly, this series affects file_inode() too. So there may exist more commits to revert such as fea6d2a6 2017-02-14 vfs: Use upper filesystem inode in bprm_fill_uid() Here is another question. Does overlayfs support atomic_open? I remember implementing atomic_open on aufs was rather tricky many years ago, and I am interested in how overlayfs addresses it. J. R. Okajima