linux-kernel - Re: vfs / overlayfs conflict resolution for linux-next

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: <20180718132955.2bf185b7@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Wed, 18 Jul 2018 13:29:55 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: vfs / overlayfs conflict resolution for linux-next

Hi Al,

On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 03:56:37 +0100 Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> ... and now it even builds.  Said that, I would really like to hear something
> from you - I can duplicate the entire overlayfs-next and merge it into
> my #for-next and ask Steven to use that instead of your tree, but I very
> much dislike going over your head like that.
> 
> I realize that you'd been away for a while and probably are digging yourself
> from under the piles of mail, but it's getting late in the cycle and I want
> to get #for-next into reasonably sane shape.  Please, look through that
> thing and respond.

Almost everything has been removed from the overlayfs tree in
linux-next today.  The only commit there currently is:

67810693077a ovl: fix wrong use of impure dir cache in ovl_iterate()
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped