Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1159985

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ovl: allow distributed fs as lower layer

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 | NextPrevious in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


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