On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 08:11:14PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> Sorry for not replying to the previsious revisions, but I've been out
> for on vacation.
>
> I can't say I like this version. Now we've got callouts at two rather close
> levels which is not very nice from the interface POV.
On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 07:35:51AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 15:35:08 +1000
> Timothy Shimmin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > This should fix all of the filesystems in the mainline kernels to handle
> > > ATTR_KILL_SUID and ATTR_KILL_SGID correctly.
On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 02:10:31PM -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 14:44 -0400, Josef Sipek wrote:
> > Alright not the greatest of examples, there is something to be said about
> > symmetry, so...let me try again :)
> >
> > /a/
> > /b/bar
On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 10:23:29AM -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 13:11 -0400, Josef Sipek wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 07:00:12PM +0200, Jan Blunck wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 31, Josef Sipek wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Jul 30, 200
On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 07:58:49PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> On Jul 31 2007 12:36, Josef Sipek wrote:
> >[2] http://www.filesystems.org/unionfs-odf.txt
>
> >Instead, the new ODF code stores whiteouts as hardlinks to a special
> >(regular) zero-length file in
On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 12:00:42PM +0200, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 31. Juli 2007 19:00 schrieb Jan Blunck:
> > On Tue, Jul 31, Josef Sipek wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 06:13:35PM +0200, Jan Blunck wrote:
> > > > Introduce white-out suppor
On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 06:03:06PM +0100, Mark Williamson wrote:
> > Really the only sane way of keeping track of whiteouts seems some external
> > store. We did an experiment with Unionfs, and moving the whiteout handling
> > to effectively a "library" that did all the dirty work cleaned up the co
On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 07:00:12PM +0200, Jan Blunck wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, Josef Sipek wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 06:13:35PM +0200, Jan Blunck wrote:
> > > Introduce white-out support to ext2.
> >
> > I think storing whiteouts on the branches
On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 06:13:35PM +0200, Jan Blunck wrote:
> Introduce white-out support to ext2.
I think storing whiteouts on the branches is wrong. It creates all sort of
nasty cases when people actually try to use unioning. Imagine a (no-so
unlikely) scenario where you have 2 unions, and they
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 02:23:30PM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> (replying from a different ID as you didn't copy me on reply)
>
> On 6/20/07, Jan Blunck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 11:22:41 +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> >
> >> +/*
> >> + * When propagating mount events to pe
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 02:51:02PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> From: Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Applied.
Thanks.
Josef "Jeff" Sipek.
--
Don't drink and derive. Alcohol and algebra don't mix.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a mes
On Sun, May 06, 2007 at 12:11:24PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 06:59:39PM -0400, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Josef 'Jeff' Sipek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > ---
> > fs/namei.c |2 +-
> > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --
Signed-off-by: Josef 'Jeff' Sipek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff --git a/fs/namei.c b/fs/namei.c
index 2995fba..1516a9b 100644
--- a/fs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/namei.c
@@ -1125,6 +1125,10 @@ static int fastcall do_path_lookup(int dfd, const char
*name,
nd->mnt = mntget(fs->rootmnt);
Stackable file systems frequently need to lookup paths or path components
starting from an arbitrary point in the namespace (identified by a dentry
and a vfsmount). Currently, such file systems use lookup_one_len, which is
frowned upon [1] as it does not pass the lookup intent along; not passing a
On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 01:22:52PM -0400, Shaya Potter wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> >On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 10:53:51 -0400 "Josef 'Jeff' Sipek"
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>The following patches introduce new branch-management code into Unionfs as
> >>well as fix a number of stability iss
On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 10:49:48AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 10:53:51 -0400 "Josef 'Jeff' Sipek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > The following patches introduce new branch-management code into Unionfs as
> > well as fix a number of stability issues and resource leaks.
On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 03:22:26PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> From: Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> stop_sioq() is called from both __init and __exit functions, so it
> shouldn't be marked __exit.
>
> Reported on the kernelnewbies mailing list, but no patch offered there.
>
> Signed-off-b
On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 09:40:00AM +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 17, 2007 at 03:56:55AM -0500, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:
> > From: Michael Halcrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Call the new lookup_one_len_nd() rather than lookup_one_len(). This fixes
> > an
> > oops when stacked on
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 09:42:33AM +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 03:37:42PM -0500, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:
> > The only fields that we have to watch out for are the dentry and vfsmount.
> > Additionally, this makes Unionfs gentler on the stack as nameidata is rather
>
On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 03:37:43PM -0500, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:
> Josef 'Jeff' Sipek (3):
> fs/unionfs/: Remove stale_inode.c
> fs/unionfs/: Andrew Morton's comments
> fs/unionfs/: Don't duplicate the struct nameidata
>
> fs/unionfs/branchman.c |4 +-
> fs/unionfs/comm
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 04:55:49PM -0600, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
...
> diff -Nurp linux-2.6.20-rc4-mm1/fs/jfs/jfs_lock.h linux/fs/jfs/jfs_lock.h
> --- linux-2.6.20-rc4-mm1/fs/jfs/jfs_lock.h2006-11-29 15:57:37.0
> -0600
> +++ linux/fs/jfs/jfs_lock.h 2007-01-17 15:30:19.0 -0600
>
On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 03:08:57PM -0500, Jason Lunz wrote:
...
> But I have a bug to report. I'm trying out yesterday's 24-patch series
> on 2.6.20-rc4 (http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/481661).
>
> The root filesystem is a union of a ro squashfs and a rw tmpfs.
> The initramfs sets it
On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 05:12:15PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> I see :). To me it just sounds as if you want to do remount-read-only
> for source filesystems, which is operation we support perfectly fine,
> and after that create union mount. But I agree you cannot do quite that
> since you need to h
On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 09:53:45AM +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 07:03:35PM -0500, Erez Zadok wrote:
> > However, I must caution that a file system like ecryptfs is very different
> > from Unionfs, the latter being a fan-out file system---and both have very
> > different
On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 09:49:35AM +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 06:25:16PM -0500, Josef Sipek wrote:
> > > There's no such problem with bind mounts. It's surprising to see such a
> > > restriction with union mounts.
> >
&
On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 01:19:48AM +0100, Giuseppe Bilotta wrote:
> As a simple user without much knowledge of kernel internals, much less
> so filesystems, couldn't something based on the same principle of
> lsof+fam be used to handle these situations?
Using inotify has been suggested before. Tha
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 05:00:18PM -0600, Michael Halcrow wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 03:51:31PM -0500, Erez Zadok wrote:
> > BTW, this is a problem with all stackable file systems, including
> > ecryptfs. To be fair, our Unionfs users have come up against this
> > problem, usually for the fi
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 02:02:24PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Jan 2007 16:30:48 -0500
> Shaya Potter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 13:19 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Mon, 8 Jan 2007 14:43:39 -0500 (EST) Shaya Potter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
>
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 01:19:57PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
...
> If it's not in the changelog or the documentation, it doesn't exist.
Good point. I'll add it for next time.
> > It's the same thing as modifying a block
> > device while a file system is using it. Now, when unionfs gets conf
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 11:18:52AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Jan 2007 23:12:53 -0500
> "Josef 'Jeff' Sipek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > +Modifying a Unionfs branch directly, while the union is mounted, is
> > +currently unsupported.
>
> Does this mean that if I have /a/b/ and
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 07:47:34PM -0500, Shaya Potter wrote:
> yes, you're writing a stackable file system (the cs.sunysb gives that
> away) and have run a lookup_one_len() on a nfs mounted file system and
> that means nd is null.
>
> Erez's group is trying to fix that situation so the intents ca
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 07:03:00PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Dec 8 2006 12:43, Josef Sipek wrote:
...
> >args->err is modified. If args is declared const, gcc complains.
>
> I never said making "args" const, but
> rather [-> http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 06:02:28PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> On Dec 8 2006 11:00, Josef Sipek wrote:
>
> +void __unionfs_mkdir(void *data)
> +{
> + struct sioq_args *args = data;
> + struct mkdir_args *m = &args->mkdir;
> +
> + args->er
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 08:08:03AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> Josef Sipek wrote:
> >> - ret = simple_fill_super(sb, IPATHFS_MAGIC, files);
> >> + ret = simple_fill_super(sb, IPATHFS_MAGIC, files, 1);
> >
> > I don't know...the magic looking 1 and 0 (later
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 11:38:13AM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> On Dec 7 2006 21:17, Josef Sipek wrote:
> >> >> > >+void __unionfs_mknod(void *data)
> >> >> > >+{
> >> >> > >+struct sioq_args *args = data;
> >>
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 05:13:08PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> This patch ensures that the inodes allocated by the functions get_sb_pseudo
> and simple_fill_super are unique, provided of course, that the filesystems
> calling them play by the rules. Currently that isn't the case, but will be
> as I
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 12:04:43PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> On Dec 4 2006 07:31, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:
>
> If the makefile contains
>
> >--- a/fs/unionfs/Makefile
> >+++ b/fs/unionfs/Makefile
> >@@ -3,3 +3,5 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_UNION_FS) += unionfs.o
> > unionfs-y := subr.o dentry.o file
On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 10:09:19PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> On Dec 4 2006 07:30, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:
> >+/* Determine the mode based on the copyup flags, and the existing dentry. */
> >+static int copyup_permissions(struct super_block *sb,
> >+ struct dentry
On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 10:02:10PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Dec 4 2006 07:30, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:
> >+long unionfs_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
> >+{
> >+long err;
> >+
> >+if ((err = unionfs_file_revalidate(file, 1)))
> >+goto out
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 07:46:50PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> I smell a big conspiracy! So yet again it's mixed mixed
>
> fs$ grep __init */*.c | grep -v ' init_'
> sysfs/mount.c:int __init sysfs_init(void)
> sysv/inode.c:int __init sysv_init_icache(void)
> proc/vmcore.c:static int __init vmco
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 07:14:58PM -0800, Nicholas Miell wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-12-07 at 13:49 +1100, David Chinner wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 09:35:30PM -0500, Josef Sipek wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 12:44:27PM +1100, David Chinner wrote:
> > > > Ma
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 12:44:27PM +1100, David Chinner wrote:
> Maybe we should be using EAs for this sort of thing instead of flags
> on the inode? If we keep adding inode flags for generic features
> then we are going to force more than just XFS into inode format
> changes eventually
Aren't
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 08:11:00PM +1100, David Chinner wrote:
> They are defined but unused in 2.6.19, right? I can't see anywhere
> in the 2.6.19 ext2/3/4/reiser trees that actually those flags,
> including setting and retrieving them from disk. JFS i can see
> sets, clears and retreives them, bu
On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 02:50:13PM -0500, Josef Sipek wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 08:27:51PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >
> > On Dec 4 2006 07:30, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:
> > >+#include "union.h"
> > >+
> > >+struct
On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 08:27:51PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> On Dec 4 2006 07:30, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:
> >+#include "union.h"
> >+
> >+struct workqueue_struct *sioq;
> >+
> >+int __init init_sioq(void)
>
> Although it's just me, I'd prefer sioq_init(), sioq_exit(),
> sioq_run(), etc.
On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 07:30:33AM -0500, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:
> The following patches are in a git repo at:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jsipek/unionfs.git
>
> (master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jsipek/unionfs.git)
>
> The repository contains the following 35
46 matches
Mail list logo
