From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Miklos Szeredi Subject: Re: Unionmount status? Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 14:29:25 +0200 Message-ID: References: <4DA4B6A8.7030804@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Jiri Kosina , Ric Wheeler , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Howells , Ian Kent , Jeff Moyer , Christoph Hellwig To: Michal Suchanek Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Michal Suchanek = wrote: > On 15 April 2011 13:31, Miklos Szeredi wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote: >>> >>> Cleaning up temporary files... >>> [ =C2=A0 =C2=A0nn.nnnnnn] overlayfs: ERROR - failed to whiteout 'mo= td' >>> find: cannot delete `./motd': Operation not supported >> >> What is the upper filesystem type? =C2=A0Is xattr support enabled? >> > > The upper filesystem is tmpfs and there is not option regarding XATTR > in the config. Apparently tmpfs does not support generic xattr. I understand why tmpfs is an attractive choice for an upper filesystem, so this should be addressed. I see two options here: 1) implement generic xattr in tmpfs 2) take whiteout/opaque support from union mounts and use that Both have advantages and disadvantages. Any thoughts? Thanks, Miklos