linux-unionfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>, linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] ovl: introduce incompatible index feature
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2017 08:57:57 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171110135757.GA16917@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1508839381-24750-2-git-send-email-amir73il@gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 01:02:58PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> Introduce a new config option OVERLAY_FS_INDEX_INCOMPAT.
> 
> If this config option is enabled then inodes index is declared
> an incompatible feature and kernel will refuse to mount an overlay
> with inodes index off when a non-empty index directory exists.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
> ---
>  fs/overlayfs/Kconfig     |  8 ++++++++
>  fs/overlayfs/dir.c       | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  fs/overlayfs/overlayfs.h |  3 ++-
>  fs/overlayfs/super.c     | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  4 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/Kconfig b/fs/overlayfs/Kconfig
> index cbfc196e5dc5..e5e6dec7d177 100644
> --- a/fs/overlayfs/Kconfig
> +++ b/fs/overlayfs/Kconfig
> @@ -43,3 +43,11 @@ config OVERLAY_FS_INDEX
>  	  outcomes.  However, mounting the same overlay with an old kernel
>  	  read-write and then mounting it again with a new kernel, will have
>  	  unexpected results.
> +
> +config OVERLAY_FS_INDEX_INCOMPAT
> +	bool "Overlayfs: support incompatible index feature"
> +	depends on OVERLAY_FS_INDEX
> +	help
> +	  If this config option is enabled then inodes index is declared an
> +	  incompatible feature and kernel will refuse to mount an overlay with
> +	  inodes index off when a non-empty index directory exists.

Hi Amir,

I don't know much about the issues you have faced. So I have few very
basic questions.

So the problem you are trying to fix is that if somebody mounted overlay
with index=on and later they try to mount it with index=off. 

What problems happen if we allow that? If its a problem, why not always
disallow that instead of making it an option. IOW, is there a use case
where we will still let user mount later with index=off.

Vivek
> diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/dir.c b/fs/overlayfs/dir.c
> index cc961a3bd3bd..7e2f748d5a7c 100644
> --- a/fs/overlayfs/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/overlayfs/dir.c
> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
>   */
>  
>  #include <linux/fs.h>
> +#include <linux/mount.h>
>  #include <linux/namei.h>
>  #include <linux/xattr.h>
>  #include <linux/security.h>
> @@ -43,6 +44,35 @@ int ovl_cleanup(struct inode *wdir, struct dentry *wdentry)
>  	return err;
>  }
>  
> +int ovl_cleanup_path(struct path *path, const char *name)
> +{
> +	struct inode *dir = path->dentry->d_inode;
> +	struct dentry *dentry;
> +	int err;
> +
> +	err = mnt_want_write(path->mnt);
> +	if (err)
> +		return err;
> +
> +	inode_lock_nested(dir, I_MUTEX_PARENT);
> +
> +	dentry = lookup_one_len(name, path->dentry, strlen(name));
> +	if (IS_ERR(dentry)) {
> +		err = PTR_ERR(dentry);
> +		dentry = NULL;
> +	} else if (!dentry->d_inode) {
> +		err = -ENOENT;
> +	} else {
> +		err = ovl_cleanup(dir, dentry);
> +	}
> +
> +	dput(dentry);
> +	inode_unlock(dir);
> +	mnt_drop_write(path->mnt);
> +
> +	return err;
> +}
> +
>  struct dentry *ovl_lookup_temp(struct dentry *workdir)
>  {
>  	struct dentry *temp;
> diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/overlayfs.h b/fs/overlayfs/overlayfs.h
> index d9a0edd4e57e..3f9a7625bded 100644
> --- a/fs/overlayfs/overlayfs.h
> +++ b/fs/overlayfs/overlayfs.h
> @@ -300,6 +300,8 @@ static inline void ovl_copyattr(struct inode *from, struct inode *to)
>  
>  /* dir.c */
>  extern const struct inode_operations ovl_dir_inode_operations;
> +int ovl_cleanup(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry);
> +int ovl_cleanup_path(struct path *path, const char *name);
>  struct dentry *ovl_lookup_temp(struct dentry *workdir);
>  struct cattr {
>  	dev_t rdev;
> @@ -309,7 +311,6 @@ struct cattr {
>  int ovl_create_real(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *newdentry,
>  		    struct cattr *attr,
>  		    struct dentry *hardlink, bool debug);
> -int ovl_cleanup(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry);
>  
>  /* copy_up.c */
>  int ovl_copy_up(struct dentry *dentry);
> diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/super.c b/fs/overlayfs/super.c
> index f5738e96a052..0dc6d61f828a 100644
> --- a/fs/overlayfs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/overlayfs/super.c
> @@ -39,6 +39,9 @@ module_param_named(index, ovl_index_def, bool, 0644);
>  MODULE_PARM_DESC(ovl_index_def,
>  		 "Default to on or off for the inodes index feature");
>  
> +static const bool ovl_incompat_index =
> +	IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OVERLAY_FS_INDEX_INCOMPAT);
> +
>  static void ovl_dentry_release(struct dentry *dentry)
>  {
>  	struct ovl_entry *oe = dentry->d_fsdata;
> @@ -1060,7 +1063,15 @@ static int ovl_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, void *data, int silent)
>  	else if (ufs->upper_mnt->mnt_sb != ufs->same_sb)
>  		ufs->same_sb = NULL;
>  
> -	if (!(ovl_force_readonly(ufs)) && ufs->config.index) {
> +	if (ovl_force_readonly(ufs)) {
> +		/*
> +		 * Cannot enable index without upperdir/workdir and cannot
> +		 * test for incompat index dir, but cannot corrupt incompat
> +		 * index dir either.
> +		 */
> +		ufs->config.index = false;
> +		pr_warn("overlayfs: no upperdir/workdir, falling back to index=off.\n");
> +	} else if (ufs->config.index) {
>  		/* Verify lower root is upper root origin */
>  		err = ovl_verify_origin(upperpath.dentry, ufs->lower_mnt[0],
>  					stack[0].dentry, false, true);
> @@ -1088,6 +1099,17 @@ static int ovl_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, void *data, int silent)
>  			pr_warn("overlayfs: try deleting index dir or mounting with '-o index=off' to disable inodes index.\n");
>  		if (err)
>  			goto out_put_indexdir;
> +
> +	} else if (ovl_incompat_index) {
> +		/*
> +		 * Try to remove empty index dir if it exists -
> +		 * failure means we need to abort the mount.
> +		 */
> +		err = ovl_cleanup_path(&workpath, OVL_INDEXDIR_NAME);
> +		if (err && err != -ENOENT) {
> +			pr_err("overlayfs: incompatible index dir exists, try deleting index dir to disable inodes index.\n");
> +			goto out_put_lower_mnt;
> +		}
>  	}
>  
>  	/* Show index=off/on in /proc/mounts for any of the reasons above */
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-unionfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  reply	other threads:[~2017-11-10 13:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-10-24 10:02 [PATCH 0/4] Overlayfs index features Amir Goldstein
2017-10-24 10:02 ` [PATCH 1/4] ovl: introduce incompatible index feature Amir Goldstein
2017-11-10 13:57   ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2017-11-10 14:46     ` Amir Goldstein
2017-11-15 14:34       ` Vivek Goyal
2017-11-15 15:14         ` Amir Goldstein
2017-10-24 10:02 ` [PATCH 2/4] ovl: declare index feature backward compatible Amir Goldstein
2017-11-10 14:21   ` Vivek Goyal
2017-11-10 14:29     ` Amir Goldstein
2017-10-24 10:03 ` [PATCH 3/4] ovl: cast a shadow of incomapt index into the past Amir Goldstein
2017-11-10 14:53   ` Vivek Goyal
2017-11-10 16:30     ` Amir Goldstein
2017-10-24 10:03 ` [PATCH 4/4] ovl: check incompat/rocompat index features Amir Goldstein
2017-10-24 15:30 ` [PATCH 0/4] Overlayfs " Amir Goldstein

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=20171110135757.GA16917@redhat.com \
    --to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
    /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).