On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 04:44:53PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote: > On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 4:34 PM, Chandan Rajendra > <chandan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > This commit adds a test to verify consistent d_ino feature when > > the overlayfs instance is composed of two different underlying > > filesystem instances. > > > > For example, > > $ mount -t xfs /dev/loop0 /mnt/test > > $ mount -t xfs /dev/loop1 /mnt/scratch > > $ mkdir /mnt/scratch/upper > > $ mkdir /mnt/scratch/work > > $ mount -t overlay overlay -o lowerdir=/mnt/test \ > > -o upperdir=/mnt/scratch/upper \ > > -o workdir=/mnt/scratch/work /mnt/merge > > > > The goal of this test is to verify that the inode numbers returned by > > readdir(3) (i.e. dirent->d_ino) are consistent with inode numbers > > returned by stat(2) (i.e. stat->st_ino) in all the below listed cases, > > - Parent's (i.e. "..") d_ino must always be calculated because a > > pure dir can be residing inside a merged dir. > > - d_ino for "." must always be calculated because the present > > directory can have a copy-up origin. > > - Verify d_ino of '.' and '..' before and after dir becomes impure. > > While at it also verify if trusted.overlay.impure xattr is > > set/reset appropriately and invalidation of readdir cache. > > - Verify copied up file's (inside a impure dir) d_ino. > > - Verify invalidation of readdir cache. > > - Verify d_ino values corresponding to "." and ".." entries of a > > pure lower dir. > > - Verify d_ino of ".." entry of a merged dir. > > - Verify pure lower residing in dir which has another lower layer > > > > Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Chandan Rajendra <chandan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Eryu, > > This test requires the following "yet to be upstreamed" overlayfs kernel > > patches to be merged, > > Clarification. The test *requires* those patches to pass, but IMO > there is nothing to prevent merging the test now. > As several functional tests before it, the test fails on upstream kernel > because overlayfs doesn't behave as it should. > > > https://marc.info/?l=linux-unionfs&m=150728247029074&w=2 > > https://marc.info/?l=linux-unionfs&m=150728190228896&w=2 > > https://marc.info/?l=linux-unionfs&m=150728190428897&w=2 Thanks all for updated test and review, and the upstream context! Eryu -- 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
