On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 7:32 PM Sargun Dhillon <sargun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 2:32 AM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 12:16 PM Sargun Dhillon <sargun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 7:00 PM Sargun Dhillon <sargun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Filesystems can implement their own flush method that release
> > > > resources, or manipulate caches. Currently if one of these
> > > > filesystems is used with overlayfs, the flush method is not called.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Sargun Dhillon <sargun@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Cc: linux-unionfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > fs/overlayfs/file.c | 11 +++++++++++
> > > > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/file.c b/fs/overlayfs/file.c
> > > > index efccb7c1f9bc..802259f33c28 100644
> > > > --- a/fs/overlayfs/file.c
> > > > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/file.c
> > > > @@ -787,6 +787,16 @@ static loff_t ovl_remap_file_range(struct file *file_in, loff_t pos_in,
> > > > remap_flags, op);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > +static int ovl_flush(struct file *file, fl_owner_t id)
> > > > +{
> > > > + struct file *realfile = file->private_data;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (realfile->f_op->flush)
> > > > + return realfile->f_op->flush(realfile, id);
> > > > +
> > > > + return 0;
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > const struct file_operations ovl_file_operations = {
> > > > .open = ovl_open,
> > > > .release = ovl_release,
> > > > @@ -798,6 +808,7 @@ const struct file_operations ovl_file_operations = {
> > > > .fallocate = ovl_fallocate,
> > > > .fadvise = ovl_fadvise,
> > > > .unlocked_ioctl = ovl_ioctl,
> > > > + .flush = ovl_flush,
> > > > #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
> > > > .compat_ioctl = ovl_compat_ioctl,
> > > > #endif
> > > > --
> > > > 2.25.1
> > > >
> > >
> > > Amir, Miklos,
> > > Is this acceptable? I discovered this being a problem when we had the discussion
> > > of whether the volatile fs should return an error on close on dirty files.
> >
> > Yes, looks ok.
> > Maybe we want to check if the realfile is upper although
> > maybe flush can release resources also on read only fs?
> >
> > >
> > > It seems like it would be useful if anyone uses NFS, or CIFS as an upperdir.
> >
> > They are not supported as upperdir. only FUSE is.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Amir.
>
> VFS does it on read-only files / mounts, so we should probably do the
> same thing.
Right, but it should handle files copied up after the oipen (i.e. call
ovl_real_fdget() to get the real file).
Thanks,
Miklos
