lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jul]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: linux-next: Tree for July 20 (overlayfs)
From
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have here a problem with linux-next (next-20110720) and
> overlayfs-v10 (not the latest from GIT).
>
> ### OVERLAYFS
> # Patches from mszeredi/vfs.git#overlayfs.v10 (up to commit
> 00b27467b181a27c808cef0d66860eba5f450b24)
> # "overlay: overlay filesystem documentation"
> # See also <http://lkml.org/lkml/2011/6/1/456>
> # "[PATCH 0/7] overlay filesystem: request for inclusion"
> + overlayfs-v10/overlayfs-v10.patch
>
> Documentation/filesystems/porting says:
>
> [mandatory]
>        ->permission(), generic_permission() and ->check_acl() have lost flags
> argument; instead of passing IPERM_FLAG_RCU we add MAY_NOT_BLOCK into mask.
>        generic_permission() has also lost the check_acl argument; if you want
> non-NULL to be used for that inode, put it into ->i_op->check_acl.
>
> I checked with other files below fs/ and changed accordingly.
> So, I hope the attached patch is OK (untested, uncompiled)?
>
> What's the status of OverlayFS anyway, will it be merged into v3.1?
>
> Regards,
> - Sedat -
>

I checked again and adapted ovl_permission().

[ fs/namei.c ]
static int acl_permission_check(struct inode *inode, int mask)

Here is a v2, which compiles.

- Sedat -
[unhandled content-type:plain/text]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-07-20 21:31    [W:0.034 / U:0.144 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site