Re: [PATCH 2/6] ovl: check if upperdir fs supports O_TMPFILE

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This is needed for choosing between concurrent copyup
> using O_TMPFILE and legacy copyup using workdir+rename.

I'm really wondering if we should constrain upper fs to those that:

 - can do RENAME_EXCHANGE and RENAME_WHITEOUT
 - can do ->tmpfile() which is currently a superset of the above
 - can do xattr, again a superset

The question is whether anybody actually using it with an fs that
doesn't have all of the above.  Because if so, we need to keep
supporting them.  Perhaps we should add warnings about deprecation and
if nobody complains we can remove support for non-conformant fs.

Thanks,
Miklos
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux