From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BED8D7F50 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 05:59:38 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B23E8F8071 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 03:59:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail04.adl6.internode.on.net (ipmail04.adl6.internode.on.net [150.101.137.141]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id SjeLAPcLaVYPqRpj for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 03:59:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from disappointment.disaster.area ([192.168.1.110] helo=disappointment) by dastard with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YaMYY-0002sX-1U for xfs@oss.sgi.com; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 21:59:34 +1100 Received: from dave by disappointment with local (Exim 4.82_1-5b7a7c0-XX) (envelope-from ) id 1YaMYY-00012z-0b for xfs@oss.sgi.com; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 21:59:34 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: [PATCH 0/5 V2] xfs: RENAME_WHITEOUT support Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 21:59:26 +1100 Message-Id: <1427194771-3105-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: xfs@oss.sgi.com Hi folks, This is the second version of the RENAME_WHITEOUT patchset that I originally posted here: http://oss.sgi.com/pipermail/xfs/2015-February/040378.html This is mainly the breakup and restructuring of the patchset I mention that needed to be done, as well as addressing the comments that were made at the time (e.g. wino -> wip). The patchset has been split into 5 patches, the first four are really cleanup and factoring patches to make the rename and inode locking code a bit simpler and easier to understand. The last patch then introduces the RENAME_WHITEOUT functionality, which ends up being surprisingly little code.... The changes pass xfstests, but I have not run them on overlayfs at all yet, so I don't know if that's going to result in smoke and tears yet. Still, getting the patch set out for review now is more important that waiting for testing because there is relatively little time left before the 4.1 merge window opens up.... So, comments, thoughts and flames are more than welcome. -Dave. Diffstat: fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c | 408 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- fs/xfs/xfs_iops.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 239 insertions(+), 171 deletions(-) _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs