Al Viro: > > +- whiteout is hardlinked in order to reduce the consumption of inodes > > + on branch > > *blink* Whiteouts have no inodes at all. Filesystem has an additional > kind of directory entries, recognizable as whiteouts. How they are > done is up to filesystem in question. "no inodes at all"? Are you assuming the implementation in dcache only (with a new d_type flag)? And it is up to the real fs (layer or branch) whether it consumes inode or not? If so, it has a big disadvantage for the layer-fs (or branch-fs) to have to implement a new method for whiteout. Overlayfs implements whiteout as symlink+xattr which consumes an inode. And you don't like it, right? What I showed is another generic approach without xattr where the new method to whiteout is unnecessary. > > +The whiteout in aufs is very similar to Unionfs's. That is represented > > +by its filename. UnionMount takes an approach of a file mode, but I am > > +afraid several utilities (find(1) or something) will have to support it. > > Why the devil should find(1) even see them? It is the case when find(1) for the layer-fs/branch-fs directly. J. R. Okajima -- 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
