From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2019 11:37:58 +0100 From: aszlig Subject: Re: Failure to execute file on overlayfs during switch_root/chroot Message-ID: <20190314103757.GA4654@dnyarri> References: <20181207121027.GA5996@dnyarri> <20190202172914.GA17406@dnyarri> <20190203101340.GA6934@dnyarri> <20190314010928.GA748@dnyarri> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: To: Amir Goldstein Cc: Miklos Szeredi , overlayfs , Graham Christensen , Samuel Dionne-Riel , cleverca22@gmail.com List-ID: --gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 09:47:23AM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > Overlayfs is not expected to modify the lower layer. That is pretty clear, I mean that's the whole point of overlayfs, right? :-) > OTOH, I can't really think anything that should break horribly if > we allow overlayfs to update atime on a writable lower layer?? It wasn't using O_NOATIME prior to Linux 4.19 (which is where this was star= ting to break our tooling), but the bisected commit I mentioned initially (a6518f73e60e5044656d1ba587e7463479a9381a) was (implicitly) introducing O_NOATIME, so to the contrary I'd say it would actually un-break networking file systems with overlayfs. a! --=20 aszlig Universal dilettante --gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABYIAB0WIQTdUmvHdn26KBbAleVoQInOZ+u2kQUCXIovBAAKCRBoQInOZ+u2 kXENAPwPFcjmqyJzzX0fokrXkilqLyzI3++QEIRo4nLIiFB3hAD9EuddUXTTlJ1s 2JVxMfMmDMvtb5D86VCZmbN9Du/ymQg= =qULp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy--