From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751676AbbCTQ0G (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:26:06 -0400 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:59468 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751427AbbCTQ0C (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:26:02 -0400 Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:25:58 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Miklos Szeredi Cc: Josh Boyer , Karel Zak , dhowells@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: d_path() and overlay fs Message-ID: <20150320162558.GA29656@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20150320132914.GA1749@ws.net.home> <20150320160123.GE20913@tucsk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150320160123.GE20913@tucsk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 05:01:23PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > But it does take care of the majority of f_path users that actually want the > covering path. Bloody bad idea, IMO. I have no objections against adding _helpers_ from that patch (seq_file_path(), etc.), but I really don't like adding that second struct path there. And it still doesn't fix the issue with LSM, etc., so we'll _still_ need to fix it sane way.