Re: [PATCH v10 07/18] ovl: Add mechanism to create a chain of origin dentries

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 3:45 PM, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 09:46:33PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 9:34 PM, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 8:39 PM, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> There is a need to support metacopy dentry in midlayer. That means there
>> >> could be a chain of metacopy dentries.
>> >>
>> >> For example, upper could be metacopy, midlayer lower could be metacopy and
>> >> lowest layer could be actual data inode. This means when we copy up actual
>> >> data, we should be able to reach to lowest data inode and copy up data from
>> >> there. And that means we should keep track of all the dentries in origin
>> >> chain which lead to data inode.
>> >>
>> >> Current ovl_check_origin() logic only looks for one origin dentry. This patch
>> >> enhances ovl_check_origin() to continue to follow origin chain and return
>> >> all the origin entries found. This is done only if caller of the function
>> >> set "follow_chain" argument.
>> >>
>> >
>> > We don't really need to keep the entire chain do we?
>> > We can follow chain but keep only the one inode that is not a metacopy inode.
>> > All the rest are useless, no?
>> > Then we don't create a new type of object - non-dir with numlower > 1.
>> >
>>
>> Seems like if you don't keep the entire chain, then no need for
>> patches 14 and 15.
>
> I will need to have atleast 2 lower dentries. One will be top most
> metadata copy and other lower most data dentry. IOW, both the ends of
> the chain need to be there.
>
>> Also with upper metacopy, you can fix upper origin xattr after
>> following to the data
>> origin and forget about middle layer metacopies forever.
>
> If upper metacopy is alreday there, then I agree that lower top most
> becomes inner node of chain and we can get rid of it.
>
>>
>> Am I missing something?
>
> I think you are missing the case when there is no upper and lower has
> a metacopy chain. In that case we need to retain two dentries. One for
> data copy up and one for metadata copy up.
>

OK. so you can get rid of all the middle metacopies while following
the origin chain. no reason to keep those.

Thanks,
Amir.
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystems Devel]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux