[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141119015908.GV7996@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 01:59:08 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...ntu.com>,
Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>, linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org,
Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: How to cope with two incompatible overlayfs formats out in the
wild
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 03:28:03PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> So from mainline we need two things:
>
> - when mounting distinguish between old and new format.
>
> - userspace can detect which formats are supported by the kernel.
>
> If we'd have a different filesystem type for the old and new formats,
> then that would solve both (checking /proc/filesystems would indicate
> which one is supported).
>
> Unfortunately that would mean having to change "overlayfs" type to
> something else in 3.18. Question is, is there some sane name which
> would fit? "overlayfs2" is perhaps the best, but I'm not overly
> enthusiastic about it.
>
> Any other ideas?
Umm... What does the old one do when it sees workdir=<something> in the
options?
--
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