Re: [POC/RFC PATCH] overlayfs: fix data inconsistency at copy up

From	Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [POC/RFC PATCH] overlayfs: fix data inconsistency at copy up
Date	2016-10-21 15:20 +0200
Message-ID	<suHTP-60l-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<srrVg-52p-33@gated-at.bofh.it> <susrL-45X-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <suE9B-3xe-61@gated-at.bofh.it> <suEsX-3Ew-55@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:13 AM, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think it would be a good idea in general to stabilize the overlay ino/dev
>> throughout copy-up, same as Miklos suggested to do for directories, to
>> all files:
>> pure upper uses upper ino + overlayfs dev
>> non-pure upper uses lower ino + overlayfs dev
>
> Making st_ino, st_dev and d_ino behave consistently would be the next big step.
>
> The above scheme only works if lower and upper are on the same
> filesystem.  Otherwise there can be collisions between the lower and
> upper inode numbers.  Perhaps you meant:
>
> - pure upper uses upper ino + upper dev
> - non-pure upper uses lower ino + overlayfs dev
>
> It works for the single lower layer case, but again breaks if there
> are multiple lower layers.   And d_ino in a merged directory could
> still get us into trouble.  And find -xdev would not do what you'd
> expect with a "normal" filesystem.
>
> So there doesn't appear to be any easy solutions to this...
>

Not for the general case there isn't, but I was actually thinking of
the docker case
and there is a lot that can be done for the use case of lower and upper on the
same fs to make overlayfs more compliant.
Since it's quite a common use case, perhaps its worth the special treatment.

Amir.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [POC/RFC PATCH] overlayfs: fix data inconsistency at copy up Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> - 2016-10-20 22:50 +0200
  Re: [POC/RFC PATCH] overlayfs: fix data inconsistency at copy up Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> - 2016-10-20 23:00 +0200
    Re: [POC/RFC PATCH] overlayfs: fix data inconsistency at copy up Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 11:00 +0200
      Re: [POC/RFC PATCH] overlayfs: fix data inconsistency at copy up Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> - 2016-10-21 22:20 +0200
        Re: [POC/RFC PATCH] overlayfs: fix data inconsistency at copy up Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> - 2016-10-22 09:30 +0200
          Re: [POC/RFC PATCH] overlayfs: fix data inconsistency at copy up Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> - 2016-10-22 17:40 +0200
            Re: [POC/RFC PATCH] overlayfs: fix data inconsistency at copy up Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> - 2016-10-24 10:20 +0200
    Re: [POC/RFC PATCH] overlayfs: fix data inconsistency at copy up Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> - 2016-10-21 11:20 +0200
      Re: [POC/RFC PATCH] overlayfs: fix data inconsistency at copy up Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> - 2016-10-21 15:40 +0200
  Re: [POC/RFC PATCH] overlayfs: fix data inconsistency at copy up Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 11:20 +0200
    Re: [POC/RFC PATCH] overlayfs: fix data inconsistency at copy up Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> - 2016-10-21 11:40 +0200
      Re: [POC/RFC PATCH] overlayfs: fix data inconsistency at copy up Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 15:20 +0200

csiph-web