On Sat, Nov 18, 2023 at 10:02 PM Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 12, 2023 at 09:26:28AM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > > Tested the patch below. > > If you want to apply it as part of dcache cleanup, it's fine by me. > > Otherwise, I will queue it for the next overlayfs update. > > OK... Let's do it that way - overlayfs part goes into never-rebased branch > (no matter which tree), pulled into dcache series and into your overlayfs > update, with removal of unused stuff done in a separate patch in dcache > series. > Sounds good. > That way we won't step on each other's toes when reordering, etc. > Does that work for you? I can put the overlayfs part into #no-rebase-overlayfs > in vfs.git, or you could do it in a v6.7-rc1-based branch in your tree - > whatever's more convenient for you. I've reset overlayfs-next to no-rebase-overlayfs, as it had my version with removal so far. For the final update, I doubt I will need to include it at all, because the chances of ovl_obtain_alias() colliding with anything for the next cycle are pretty slim, but it's good that I have the option and I will anyway make sure to always test the next update with this change. Thanks, Amir.
