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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 22:23:50 +0000 From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>, linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Robo Bot <apw@...onical.com>, Felix Fietkau <nbd@...nwrt.org>, Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>, Jordi Pujol <jordipujolp@...il.com>, ezk@....cs.sunysb.edu, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...glemail.com>, "J. R. Okajima" <hooanon05@...oo.co.jp> Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] overlay filesystem: request for inclusion (v16) On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 02:50:02PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> wrote: > > Al and Linus, > > > > Please consider overlayfs for inclusion into 3.10. > > Yes, I think we should just do it. It's in use, it's pretty small, and > the other alternatives are worse. Let's just plan on getting this > thing done with. > > Al, I realize you may not love this, but can you please give this a > look? People clearly want to use it. In particular the new interfaces, > like the inode ops open function with dentry passed in or whatever? > The changes outside of overlayfs looked fine to me. I'll post a review tonight or tomorrow. FWIW, I was not too happy with it the last time I looked, but I'll obviously need to reread the whole thing. I *have* looked at unionmount lately, and the recent modifications dhowells is doing there are closing most of my problems with that; on the other hand, there's no fundamental reason why both can't get merged. Hell, might as well resurrect aufs, while we are at it... union-like things are actually on top of my "things to deal with this cycle" list, closely folowed by rework of ->readdir(). Miklos, two points: * I would very much prefer to deal with that (as well as unionmount and aufs) as git branches _expected_ to be reordered/rebased/folded/mutilated/etc. while we are sorting all that stuff out. For now, let's base them on -rc1. I expect that vfs.git will grow common stem, with bits and pieces of those guys getting gradually pulled into it, at which point(s) the rest will be rebased. * what Linus just said about bisectablity Oh, and the third one - I still owe you a bottle of your choice for sorting the atomic_open shite out. Is there any chance you'll be able to attend LSFS this year? -- 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