linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/9] overlay filesystem: request for inclusion (v17)

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]

Date:	Fri, 15 Mar 2013 05:13:23 +0000
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	"J. R. Okajima" <hooanon05@...oo.co.jp>
Cc:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	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, mszeredi@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] overlay filesystem: request for inclusion (v17)

On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 02:09:14PM +0900, J. R. Okajima wrote:

> If so, it has a big disadvantage for the layer-fs (or branch-fs) to have
> to implement a new method for whiteout.
> 
> Overlayfs implements whiteout as symlink+xattr which consumes an
> inode. And you don't like it, right?
> What I showed is another generic approach without xattr where the new
> method to whiteout is unnecessary.

I'm yet to see the reason that would make implementing that method a big
disadvantage, TBH...
--
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/