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 155057F47 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 14:41:22 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFFC48F8033 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 12:41:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id ZDAPA7suha9BtoK0 (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 12:41:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 15:41:18 -0400 From: Brian Foster Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5 V2] xfs: RENAME_WHITEOUT support Message-ID: <20150324194117.GA15973@bfoster.bfoster> References: <1427194771-3105-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <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: , 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: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 09:59:26PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > 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. > These all look pretty good to me. I ran a quick rename test on top of overlayfs as well and it seems to do what it's supposed to (e.g., rename of a file on the lower dir is hidden via whiteout on the upper). For the set... Reviewed-by: Brian Foster > -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 _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs