[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090608195752.GD4363@fsbox>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 12:57:52 -0700
From: Valerie Aurora <vaurora@...hat.com>
To: Jan Rekorajski <baggins@...h.mimuw.edu.pl>,
Jan Blunck <jblunck@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
bharata@...ibm.com, dwmw2@...radead.org, mszeredi@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/32] VFS based Union Mount (V3)
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 02:54:19PM +0200, Jan Rekorajski wrote:
> On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote:
>
> > Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation.
>
> Is there any chance this will support NFS? I can union-mount tmpfs over
NFS as the read-only layer ought to work. NFS as the read-write layer
is still up in the air.
> nfs mounted fs, but if I try to mount --union two NFS filesystems I
> always get -EBUSY on second mount on the same mountpoint.
>
> Something along these lines:
>
> doesn't matter if I use --union on first mount, the result is always the
> same.
>
> mount <--union> -t nfs server:/export/system /mnt
> OK
> mount --union -t nfs server:/export/profile /mnt
> mount.nfs: /mnt is busy or already mounted
>
> I patched mount.nfs so it knows about MS_UNION, and strace shows me that
> it passes that flag to kernel.
FYI, using --union on the first mount will make it union with the
local directory below it. The --union option is not needed when you
mount the lower read-only layer.
You'll get -EBUSY on the second mount of any NFS file system over
another - try it again with the --union flag. Support for NFS on NFS
union mount would have to change this.
-VAL
--
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