[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
    On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote:
    > On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Al Viro <> 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.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2011-03-22 20:01    [W:0.040 / U:4.660 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site