From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751718Ab1GONdi (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jul 2011 09:33:38 -0400 Received: from mail06-md.ns.itscom.net ([175.177.155.116]:37685 "EHLO mail06-md.ns.itscom.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750924Ab1GONdh (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jul 2011 09:33:37 -0400 From: "J. R. Okajima" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] overlay filesystem: request for inclusion To: Miklos Szeredi Cc: Andrew Morton , NeilBrown , viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, apw@canonical.com, nbd@openwrt.org, hramrach@centrum.cz, jordipujolp@gmail.com, ezk@fsl.cs.sunysb.edu In-Reply-To: <87fwm7d74s.fsf@tucsk.pomaz.szeredi.hu> References: <1306932380-10280-1-git-send-email-miklos@szeredi.hu> <20110608153208.dc705cda.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20110609115934.3c53f78f@notabene.brown> <20110608205233.ebfedc4d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <87wrgvb28a.fsf@tucsk.pomaz.szeredi.hu> <20110609123843.77153b27.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <877h8uzmsi.fsf@tucsk.pomaz.szeredi.hu> <21324.1307677721@jrobl> <871uyxa7ol.fsf@tucsk.pomaz.szeredi.hu> <8739ig3k93.fsf@tucsk.pomaz.szeredi.hu> <8536.1310214135@jrobl> <87k4bjd8pc.fsf@tucsk.pomaz.szeredi.hu> <12864.1310734928@jrobl> <87fwm7d74s.fsf@tucsk.pomaz.szeredi.hu> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 22:33:34 +0900 Message-ID: <13585.1310736814@jrobl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Miklos Szeredi: > Overlayfs will create a private clone of both the lower and upper > mounts. The mnt_flags are only modified on the private clone, whose > sole user is overlayfs itself. Yes, I've found overlayfs creates private clone mounts. Sorry noise again. By cloning privately, users cannot change mount flags. But it will not be a big problem. By the way, you might remember that I have asked about overriding creditials and signals. When a process issues chmod, rename or something, then the internal copyup happens. If RLIMIT_FSIZE is set to the process, then it may fire SIGXFSZ and return EFBIG. It looks strange. But I don't know how important is it since setting RLIMIT_FSIZE is less popular I am afraid. J. R. Okajima