lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Mar]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/6 v7] overlay filesystem - request for inclusion
    From
    Date
    On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote:
    > On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
    > >
    > > Locking analysis would be really nice; AFAICS, it violates locking order
    > > when called from e.g. ->setattr()

    Locking order is always:

    -> overlayfs locks
    -> upper fs locks
    -> lower fs locks

    So it's really pretty simple and easy to validate.

    > > and its protection against renames is
    > > nowhere near enough.  I might be missing something subtle, but...

    Protection is exactly as for userspace callers. AFAICT.

    > Miklos - have you tried using this with lockdep (together with the
    > same filesystems mounted natively too)? I'd expect that that should
    > show any bad lock usage..

    Ah, lockdep. I have tried, but there seems to be always something
    that triggers it at boot time on my laptop, which makes it useless. I
    could find some other machine to test this on, though.

    Thanks,
    Miklos
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2011-03-22 20:01    [W:0.023 / U:119.028 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site