From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vivek Goyal Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ovl: Check link ability between upperdir and workdir Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 10:42:42 -0500 Message-ID: <20171219154242.GA6043@redhat.com> References: <1513601748-57439-1-git-send-email-cgxu519@icloud.com> <20171218160251.GA7474@redhat.com> <20171219134849.GA2737@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:35294 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751517AbdLSPmn (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Dec 2017 10:42:43 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-unionfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org To: Amir Goldstein Cc: Chengguang Xu , Miklos Szeredi , overlayfs On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 04:11:13PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: [..] > With non-indexed copy up (of regular file, when O_TMPFILE supported) > tmpfile is created in upperdir and linked to upper dir, which allows for > concurrent copy up of two files within different parent dirs. Is it correct. I am looking at the code and we always seem to get tmpfile in work/work. ovl_copy_up_locked() ovl_get_tmpfile() ovl_do_tmpfile(c->workdir, c->stat.mode) I was hoping that for a regular file copy up, we could create tmpfile in upper/ so that we don't have the requirement of allowing linking between work/ and upper/ as long as upper supported tmpfile. But given that index will require linking with alias in upper, we can't get rid of this requirement completely. Vivek