linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] overlay filesystem: request for inclusion

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <BANLkTi=KNL+MiX=R845yz188pTg8hMtRhQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 16 Jun 2011 11:45:45 +0200
From:	Michal Suchanek <hramrach@...trum.cz>
To:	Erez Zadok <ezk@....cs.sunysb.edu>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
	"viro@...IV.linux.org.uk Viro" <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	apw@...onical.com, nbd@...nwrt.org, neilb@...e.de,
	jordipujolp@...il.com, mszeredi@...e.cz,
	"J. R. Okajima" <hooanon05@...oo.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] overlay filesystem: request for inclusion

On 16 June 2011 08:51, Erez Zadok <ezk@....cs.sunysb.edu> wrote:
> On Jun 8, 2011, at 3:32 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:

>
> Val, Jan, Bharata, and others have spent untold amounts of time trying to develop a VFS-based approach.  In lieu of stackable file system approaches, I was hoping to see those VFS-based approaches get the support needed to get merged, and yet they have not.  It appears that development of the VFS-based approaches has stalled, sadly.  To be fair, I have argued before that adding a lot of code to the VFS "just" to support unioning was a bad idea (see http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/12/13/242).  And I also felt that it was going to be hard to support approaches which required changes (however small) to many individual file systems (e.g., to add native whiteout support). But was I'd have been happy to see a VFS-based approach get merged, if the Powers That Be[™] sanctioned it.

Is there any reason why unionmount could not use the xattrs which are
natively supported by most filesystem already like overlayfs does?
That would cut on the sheer number of patches required to get it
working.

Thanks

Michal
--
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/