From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.133]:46958 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754072AbeFKGJy (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jun 2018 02:09:54 -0400 Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2018 23:09:50 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Miklos Szeredi , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-fsdevel , linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org, Al Viro Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] overlayfs update for 4.18 Message-ID: <20180611060950.GA8048@infradead.org> References: <20180608121330.GG23785@veci.piliscsaba.redhat.com> <20180609065208.GA31572@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, Jun 09, 2018 at 02:42:20PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > And Christoph's copmmentary isn't really helping the situation. > Christoph, I haven't seen the NAK history, can you elaborate? Most of the bits just need a bit of refinement I think, instead of being forced through the overlayfs tree and are generally fine. The pre_mmap hook I think is a clear no-go. We've had this tried multiple times and always rejected it. Unlike previous uses the overlayfs use isn't outright broken, but still questionalable as it will still lead to a copyup that "leaks" if the actual mmap wasn't successfull. The whole discussion of how mmap happens, how we deal with mmap_sem and failures needs a broader discussion with all MM and VFS folks first.