On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 07:58:17PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Locking analysis would be really nice; AFAICS, it violates locking order > > > when called from e.g. ->setattr() > > Locking order is always: > > -> overlayfs locks > -> upper fs locks > -> lower fs locks > > So it's really pretty simple and easy to validate. In which *order* on the upper fs? > Protection is exactly as for userspace callers. AFAICT. Pardon? You traverse the chain of ancestors; fine, but who says it stays anywhere near being relevant as you go? -- 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
