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 Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 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.
>>
>
>
> But how exactly do we "support" those fs right now?
> Any attempt to use them would result in -EINVAL, because we will
> bw requesting RENAME_EXCHANGE and RENAME_WHITEOUT

Not unless whiteout/opaque objects are involved, and in fact those are
not very common, so I can imagine a limited usage that doesn't involve
those and will work fine.  But I don't think this scenario is likely,
so we should try deprecating it.

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