[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJfpegvfsG1G6LDNuYdvH-d_pGXx4hq6qS4WfVHhj27cbdHj9w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 14:35:54 +0100
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
hch@...radead.org, apw@...onical.com, nbd@...nwrt.org,
neilb@...e.de, jordipujolp@...il.com, ezk@....cs.sunysb.edu,
dhowells@...hat.com, sedat.dilek@...glemail.com,
hooanon05@...oo.co.jp, mszeredi@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] overlay: overlay filesystem documentation
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 12:06 AM, Andrew Morton
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 15:16:32 +0100 Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> wrote:
>
>> From: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>
>>
>> Document the overlay filesystem.
>>
>
> Damn, I did it again. This is good, thanks.
>
>> +Changes to the underlying filesystems while part of a mounted overlay
>> +filesystem are not allowed. If the underlying filesystem is changed,
>> +the behavior of the overlay is undefined, though it will not result in
>> +a crash or deadlock.
>
> ah-hah, there it is. I was wondering how this can-o-worms would be
> handled ;)
>
> Is there anything in place to enforce this at runtime? Checks for
> read-onlyness, code to prevent rw remounts, etc?
No, currently it is not enforced. I didn't think this was important
enough, and there was no complaint about this from users. I think
most people are going to be careful, especially if lots of warnings
are given in the documentation.
Thanks,
Miklos
--
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