On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 1:50 PM, Richard Weinberger <rich...@nod.at> wrote: > Hi! > > Am 11.04.2017 um 12:20 schrieb Amir Goldstein: >> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Richard Weinberger <rich...@nod.at> wrote: >>> Am 06.04.2017 um 14:09 schrieb Richard Weinberger: >>>>> Were you able to make any progress? still working on this? >>>>> If this is too complicated to get in for this cycle, better send a patch >>>>> to disable O_TMPFILE support for ubifs and fix the problem properly on >>>>> followup merge cycle. >>>>> Because right now ubifs O_TMPFILE support is broken and breaks overlayfs >>>>> mount. >>>> >>>> I have a test and currently testing it. As it looks the situation is less >>>> worse >>>> than I thought first. :-) >>> >>> s/test/patch :) >>> >> >> Richard, >> >> Maybe it's not my business to interfere with ubifs development and I >> haven't seen your patch. >> >> But on the face of it, it doesn't sound like fixing O_TMPFILE is a >> trivial fix, so not sure >> it is wise to send a patch for -rc7?... >> >> How about sending the patch to disable O_TMPFILE for -rc7 and queuing >> your fix for v4.12? >> Without any patch, v4.11 is going to have a regression with overlayfs+ubifs. > > No need to panic.
Who? me? ;-) > I verified some stuff and my first patch does the right thing but not in a > nice way, > except in oneerror patch. In will land in -rc7. > That patch looks simple enough. I though you had a more complex patch in mind. > For the next merge window I prepare patches that introduce a new journal > function > for handling tmpfiles. > Thanks for the update. Cheers, Amir.