[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/22][RFC] Unionfs: Stackable Namespace Unification Filesystem
Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Sun, 3 September 2006 11:05:08 +0000, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > - Modifying a Unionfs branch directly, while the union is mounted, is
> > > currently unsupported. Any such change may cause Unionfs to oops
> > > and it can even result in data loss!
> >
> > I'm not sure if that is acceptable. Even root user should be unable to
> > oops the kernel using 'normal' actions.
> Direct modification of branches is similar to direct modification of
> block devices underneith a mounted filesystem. While I agree that
> such a thing _should_ not oops the kernel, I'd bet that you can easily
> run a stresstest on a filesystem while randomly flipping bits in the
> block device and get just that.

Not really a fair comparison. The block level is conceptionally totally
different than the fs level, while a stackable fs is within the realms of
the fs level.

> There are bigger problems in unionfs to worry about.

Agreed. Moving basic functionality abstractions into the VFS could easily
alleviate theses kinds of problems.



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: 2006-09-05 06:49    [W:0.123 / U:1.096 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site