On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Linus Torvalds <torva...@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 9:28 AM, Miklos Szeredi <mik...@szeredi.hu> wrote: >>> >>> I would suggest that whiteouts appear as otherwise negative dentries and >>> that >>> they don't appear in getdents(). >> >> I'd argue that this is an administration nightmare. E.g. what if the >> a backup needs to be made of the rw layer? > > The major issue is user space support. > > So what do others that support this do? Looking at the gitweb for > ls.c in coreutils, we find: > > http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=blob;f=src/ls.c > > # ifdef DT_WHT > case DT_WHT: type = whiteout; break; > # endif > > so that's presumably what we should use.
Fair enough, that allows the thing to be listed, at least. What about creation? A new syscall? Removal? unlink(2)? Should stat(2) succeed with a new filetype? Thanks, Miklos -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
