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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20130315203018.GZ21522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Fri, 15 Mar 2013 20:30:18 +0000
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	"J. R. Okajima" <hooanon05@...oo.co.jp>
Cc:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
	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 Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 03:57:18AM +0900, J. R. Okajima wrote:
> 
> Al Viro:
> > The trouble with such mechanisms is that they tend to end up depending on
> > fairly non-trivial properties of underlying fs.  Try aufs one on btrfs,
> > see how soon you spot the problem.  It's nice when a method turns out
> > to be really redundant and implementable in uniform way via other methods
> > present; see fh_to_dentry history for example of situation where it hadn't...
> 
> Hmm, I could not see problem around aufs using btrfs as the upper RW
> branch, tested on linux-3.9-rc2.
> Would you describe more specifically?

Sure - btrfs happens to have an interesting limit on the number of
links to the same object located in one directory.

The thing is, you are trying to retrofit a new primitive into many
filesystems and do it in the same way.  Doesn't work well...

And yes, it is an independent primitive.  What I really don't understand
is WTF is so attractive about not having to touch individual filesystems;
it's not particulary hard to do for any fs we might care about...
--
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/