Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1159985
| Path | csiph.com!aioe.org!aspen.stu.neva.ru!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!fu-berlin.de!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod |
|---|---|
| From | ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) |
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] ovl: allow distributed fs as lower layer |
| Date | Sun, 07 Jun 2015 03:10:01 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <pyxg5-B2-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <pxDxf-2hN-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <pxDxg-2hN-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <pxNmW-8sC-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <py1SV-4ir-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| X-Original-To | Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> |
| User-Agent | Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) |
| MIME-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain |
| X-Xm-Aid | U2FsdGVkX1/CmWzSVkb2hdAzwU0RbKeoftlzlN8VDgs= |
| X-Sa-Exim-Connect-IP | 67.3.205.90 |
| X-Sa-Exim-Mail-From | ebiederm@xmission.com |
| X-Spam-Report | * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.0 TVD_RCVD_IP Message was received from an IP address * 1.5 XMNoVowels Alpha-numberic number with no vowels * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: No description available. * 0.8 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60% * [score: 0.5000] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa07 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] |
| X-Spam-Dcc | XMission; sa07 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 |
| X-Spam-Combo | *;Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> |
| X-Spam-Timing | total 489 ms - load_scoreonly_sql: 0.17 (0.0%), signal_user_changed: 6 (1.3%), b_tie_ro: 4.0 (0.8%), parse: 1.99 (0.4%), extract_message_metadata: 18 (3.6%), get_uri_detail_list: 1.45 (0.3%), tests_pri_-1000: 8 (1.7%), tests_pri_-950: 1.95 (0.4%), tests_pri_-900: 1.30 (0.3%), tests_pri_-400: 23 (4.7%), check_bayes: 21 (4.4%), b_tokenize: 6 (1.3%), b_tok_get_all: 7 (1.4%), b_comp_prob: 2.6 (0.5%), b_tok_touch_all: 2.9 (0.6%), b_finish: 0.91 (0.2%), tests_pri_0: 416 (85.2%), tests_pri_500: 6 (1.2%), rewrite_mail: 0.00 (0.0%) |
| X-Spam-Flag | No |
| X-Sa-Exim-Version | 4.2.1 (built Wed, 24 Sep 2014 11:00:52 -0600) |
| X-Sa-Exim-Scanned | Yes (on in01.mta.xmission.com) |
| Sender | robomod@news.nic.it |
| List-ID | <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org> |
| X-Mailing-List | linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org |
| Approved | robomod@news.nic.it |
| Lines | 51 |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
| X-Original-Cc | Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>, linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sa-dev@rainbow.by, andre.roth@roche.com |
| X-Original-Date | Sat, 06 Jun 2015 20:02:56 -0500 |
| X-Original-Message-ID | <877frgwcsf.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> |
| X-Original-References | <1433424586-7771-1-git-send-email-miklos@szeredi.hu> <1433424586-7771-3-git-send-email-miklos@szeredi.hu> <20150605000715.GP7232@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20150605150939.GA2174@tucsk> |
| X-Original-Sender | linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org |
| Xref | aioe.org linux.kernel:1159985 |
Show key headers only | View raw
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> writes:
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 01:07:15AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
>
>> Umm... Cosmetical point is that this
>>
>> > +static bool ovl_remote(struct dentry *root)
>> > +{
>> > + const struct dentry_operations *dop = root->d_op;
>> > +
>> > + return dop && (dop->d_revalidate || dop->d_weak_revalidate);
>> > +}
>>
>> is better done as
>> root->d_flags & (DCACHE_OP_REVALIDATE | DCACHE_OP_WEAK_REVALIDATE)
>
> Okay.
>
>>
>> More interesting question is whether anything in the system relies on
>> existing behaviour that follows ->d_revalidate() returning 0.
>
> Hmm, d_invalidate() almost always follows ->d_revalidate(). Almost, becuase RCU
> lookup can get aborted at that point. We can easily stick d_invalidate() in
> there for the non-RCU case.
>
> Regular lookup also almost always follows ->d_revalidate(). Except if
> allocation of new dentry fails. So relying on this would be buggy (which is not
> to say nobody does it).
>
>> Have you tried to mount e.g. procfs as underlying layer and torture it for a
>> while?
>
> I did try now. Nothing bad happened during the test (parallel stat(1) of the
> whole overlayed proc tree).
>
> My laptop froze while trying to write this mail. But it's 8 years old and when
> the fan starts to make noises and the weather is hot, it does this sometimes. I
> don't think that has anything to do with overlayfs, but will do more
> testing...
A nasty corner case to be aware of (and I think this is part of what Al
was warning about). /proc/sys/net is different depending upon which
current->nsproxy->net_ns.
Eric
--
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/
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH 2/2] ovl: allow distributed fs as lower layer Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> - 2015-06-05 02:10 +0200 Re: [PATCH 2/2] ovl: allow distributed fs as lower layer ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) - 2015-06-07 03:10 +0200
csiph-web