On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> @@ -258,12 +268,12 @@ static int ovl_copy_up_locked(struct den
>>> if (err)
>>> goto out_cleanup;
>>>
>>> - inode_lock(newdentry->d_inode);
>>> err = ovl_set_attr(newdentry, stat);
>>> - inode_unlock(newdentry->d_inode);
>>> if (err)
>>> goto out_cleanup;
>>>
>>> + ovl_dentry_set_ino(dentry, stat->ino);
>>> +
>>
>>
>
> Shouldn't we propagate stored ino all the way
> from lowest layer to preserve ino across layer recycling?
Since OVL_XATTR_INO is set every time we copy-up, layer recycling
should work fine.
Exception is overlay root, where there's no copy-up, so no
preservation of ino. Not sure what the right solution there is.
>
> Specifically, shouldn't ino of merged dir expose the lower most ino?
It should.
>>> @@ -353,11 +354,45 @@ static struct ovl_dir_cache *ovl_cache_g
>>> return cache;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static int ovl_cache_entry_update_ino(struct dentry *dir,
>>> + struct ovl_cache_entry *p)
>>> +
>>> +{
>>> + struct dentry *this;
>>> + struct dentry *base = ovl_dentry_at_idx(dir, p->idx);
>>> +
>>> + if (p->name[0] == '.') {
>>> + if (p->len == 1) {
>>> + this = dget(base);
>>> + goto get;
>>> + }
>>> + if (p->len == 2 && p->name[1] == '.') {
>>> + /* ♫ we shall not be moved */
>>> + this = dget(ovl_dentry_real(dir->d_parent));
>>> + goto get;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>> + this = lookup_one_len_unlocked(p->name, base, p->len);
>>> + if (IS_ERR(this)) {
>>> + pr_err("overlay: failed to look up (%s) for ino (%i)\n",
>>> + p->name, (int) PTR_ERR(this));
>>> + return -EIO;
>>> + }
>>>
>>> + get:
>>> + p->ino = p->orig_ino;
>>> + ovl_get_ino(this, &p->ino);
>
> I may be way off here, but why do you need to lookup entry and get ino
> from xattr at all? Wouldn't it be easier to not add the entry to the list if
> it was copied up and rely on the fact that it will be added to list in iter
> of lower layer with original ino with no extra effort?
What about renamed entries? What about opaque ones?
I do hope we can optimize directory reading, because doing lookup and
getxattr for all entries is going to hurt...
> For that matter, I like the fact that every copied up entry will be explicitly
> marked with OVL_XATTR_INO. In a way, it is the opposite of
> OVL_XATTR_OPAQUE and if the former becomes a standard, the latter
> will become redundant. Arguably, it is preferred to mark the copy ups
> as special case rather then the pure upper files, which can then stay 'pure'.
Maybe.
>>> @@ -502,7 +549,8 @@ static int ovl_dir_open(struct inode *in
>>> return PTR_ERR(realfile);
>>> }
>>> od->realfile = realfile;
>>> - od->is_real = !OVL_TYPE_MERGE(type);
>>> +// od->is_real = !OVL_TYPE_MERGE(type);
>>> + od->is_real = false;
>
>
> A major change of framing would be to treat regular file entries as merged
> if they have been ever copied up and opaque only if they are pure upper.
> Same as dirs.
>
> This would also allow keeping ino stable across rename/redirect of regular
> files. Not sure if any programs rely on that??
We do keep ino stable across rename. We don't keep ino stable across
copy-up. That's what this patch is trying to address.
You are saying that we should have redirects for non-dir and drop
OVL_XATTR_INO? That's another option, but it doesn't look like it
would simplify things...
Thanks for the revirew.
Pushed patch to #overlayfs-constino (needs work but it's worth testing).
Miklos
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-unionfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
