From: Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org, Jan Blunck <jblunck@suse.de>,
Erez Zadok <ezk@cs.sunysb.edu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>,
Mingming Cao <cmm@us.ibm.com>, Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Union mount readdir support in glibc
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:19:35 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080311124935.GA9121@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080311080929.B076D26F991@magilla.localdomain>
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 01:09:29AM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> It seems very unlikely you'd come up with a version of this plan that we'd
> find acceptable in glibc. readdir does buffering, sometimes entry format
> conversion, and it can skip dummy entries. That's it. It's not going to
> become a big hairy thing with all kinds of new state. Sorry.
In the approach we are suggesting, at the minimum, glibc readdir would
have to maintain a unified cache of dirents with the knowlege of
whiteouts (DT_WHT). Would that be too much ?
>
> This really is the kernel filesystem's problem. It just doesn't make sense
> to expect userland to implement half of your directory semantics for you.
> What are you going to do when you want to export a union directory to NFS?
> readdir is a filesystem operation. You're implementing a filesystem.
Not really. In Union Mount, most of the unification support is done at
VFS layer with some support from filesystems (for things like
whiteouts). It is Unionfs which implements a new filesystem to achieve
unification. Unification is not purely a kernel filesystem's problem, it
involves both VFS and FS.
>
> Exposing DT_WHT entries may be useful as a user feature. (BSD had unions
> with whiteouts years ago, and their ls et al have options to let you see
> and operate on whiteouts explicitly so users can make sense of strange
> situations with unions.) But even for that, we'd have to consider the
> compatibility issues.
AFAIK, even BSD implements duplicate elimination and whiteout
suppression in the userland.
Thanks for your comments.
Regards,
Bharata.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-11 12:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-11 5:55 [RFC] Union mount readdir support in glibc Bharata B Rao
2008-03-11 8:09 ` Roland McGrath
2008-03-11 12:49 ` Bharata B Rao [this message]
2008-03-12 4:28 ` Bharata B Rao
2008-03-14 3:53 ` Ulrich Drepper
2008-03-14 5:39 ` Al Viro
2008-03-14 7:13 ` Ulrich Drepper
2008-03-14 8:41 ` Miklos Szeredi
2008-03-14 17:53 ` Peter Staubach
2008-03-14 20:51 ` Miklos Szeredi
2008-03-14 20:58 ` Trond Myklebust
2008-03-14 15:07 ` Jan Blunck
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=20080311124935.GA9121@in.ibm.com \
--to=bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=cmm@us.ibm.com \
--cc=drepper@redhat.com \
--cc=ezk@cs.sunysb.edu \
--cc=haveblue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jblunck@suse.de \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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