[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070621162900.GA9457@filer.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 12:29:00 -0400
From: Josef Sipek <jsipek@....cs.sunysb.edu>
To: Bharata B Rao <bharata.rao@...il.com>
Cc: Erez Zadok <ezk@...sunysb.edu>, Jan Blunck <jblunck@...e.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] Union mount documentation.
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 10:55:45AM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
...
> Talking about copyup and whiteout at VFS layer, we have already
> demonstrated what complexity it takes to have these within VFS. Please
> take a look at the copyup and whiteout patches in our previous
> releases at:
>
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/17/150
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/5/14/69
>
> Or may be wait till I clean all those up to work with the new union
> new stack infrastructure which I have posted here.
Really, the problem for both, union mounts and unionfs, is that the concept
of unioning spans the two layers. You have the unification part - which is
very VFS-level concept, but at the same time, you got whiteouts, copyup,
(semi-?)persistent inode numbers, and a bunch of other details that just
don't belong in the VFS at all.
Josef "Jeff" Sipek.
--
Evolution, n.:
A hypothetical process whereby infinitely improbable events occur with
alarming frequency, order arises from chaos, and no one is given credit.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists