On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 18:04:50 +0300 Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 1:50 PM, Richard Weinberger <richard@xxxxxx> > wrote: > > Hi! > > > > Am 11.04.2017 um 12:20 schrieb Amir Goldstein: > >> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Richard Weinberger > >> <richard@xxxxxx> wrote: > >>> Am 06.04.2017 um 14:09 schrieb Richard Weinberger: > >>>>> Were you able to make any progress? still working on this? > >>>>> If this is too complicated to get in for this cycle, better > >>>>> send a patch to disable O_TMPFILE support for ubifs and fix the > >>>>> problem properly on followup merge cycle. > >>>>> Because right now ubifs O_TMPFILE support is broken and breaks > >>>>> overlayfs mount. > >>>> > >>>> I have a test and currently testing it. As it looks the > >>>> situation is less worse than I thought first. :-) > >>> > >>> s/test/patch :) > >>> > >> > >> Richard, > >> > >> Maybe it's not my business to interfere with ubifs development and > >> I haven't seen your patch. > >> > >> But on the face of it, it doesn't sound like fixing O_TMPFILE is a > >> trivial fix, so not sure > >> it is wise to send a patch for -rc7?... > >> > >> How about sending the patch to disable O_TMPFILE for -rc7 and > >> queuing your fix for v4.12? > >> Without any patch, v4.11 is going to have a regression with > >> overlayfs+ubifs. > > > > No need to panic. > > Who? me? ;-) > > > I verified some stuff and my first patch does the right thing but > > not in a nice way, except in oneerror patch. In will land in -rc7. > > Hi Amir, Richard Looks like the fix didn't make it into 4.11-rc7 either, isn't it time to just disable O_TMPFILE support in ubifs for now? Giving plenty time for the proper fix. Thanks Ralph > > That patch looks simple enough. > I though you had a more complex patch in mind. > > > For the next merge window I prepare patches that introduce a new > > journal function for handling tmpfiles. > > > > Thanks for the update. > Cheers, > Amir.