Messages in this thread | | | From | "J. R. Okajima" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/6 v7] overlay filesystem - request for inclusion | Date | Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:24:26 +0900 |
| |
(removed aufs-users ML since it is restricted to its members only)
"Hans-Peter Jansen": > and aufs2: it's a minimalistic version of a layered filesystem, being=20 :::
Thanks reminding us about aufs. :-)
As far as I know, overlayfs has some problems (minors?) similar to UnionMount. - for users, the inode number may change silently. eg. copy-up. - hardlinks may break by copy-up. - read(2) may get an obsoleted filedata (fstat(2) for metadata too). - fcntl(F_SETLK) may be broken by copy-up. - unnecessary copy-up may happen, for example mmap(MAP_PRIVATE) after open(O_RDWR).
And I noticed overlayfs adopts overriding credentials for copy-up. Although I didn't read about credintials in detail yet, is it safe? For example, during copy-up other thread in the same process may gain the higher capabilities unexpectedly? Signal hander in the process too?
I just have read overlayfs once a long time ago, so I may be misunderstanding. But I have no objection to merge overlayfs into mainline.
Also I'd like to thank you Pete about mentioning the recent disaster in Japan.
J. R. Okajima
| |