[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cb5a8880-ed0c-495f-b216-090ee8ff1425@igalia.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2026 13:38:06 -0300
From: André Almeida <andrealmeid@...lia.com>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>,
Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>, Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
NeilBrown <neil@...wn.name>, Olga Kornievskaia <okorniev@...hat.com>,
Dai Ngo <Dai.Ngo@...cle.com>, Tom Talpey <tom@...pey.com>,
Carlos Maiolino <cem@...nel.org>, Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org, kernel-dev@...lia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] exportfs: Rename get_uuid() to get_disk_uuid()
Em 14/01/2026 07:12, Amir Goldstein escreveu:
[...]
>
> Whether or not we should repurpose the existing get_uuid() I don't
> know - that depends whether pNFS expects the same UUID from an
> "xfs clone" as overlayfs would.
>
If we go in that direction, do you think it would be reasonable to have
this as a super_block member/helper? Also do you know any other fs that
require this type of workaround on ovl?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists