From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7094BC34056 for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 19:45:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E900F207FD for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 19:45:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=szeredi.hu header.i=@szeredi.hu header.b="eqs765CY" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726750AbgBSTpv (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Feb 2020 14:45:51 -0500 Received: from mail-io1-f65.google.com ([209.85.166.65]:33430 "EHLO mail-io1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726634AbgBSTpv (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Feb 2020 14:45:51 -0500 Received: by mail-io1-f65.google.com with SMTP id z8so1947908ioh.0 for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 11:45:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=szeredi.hu; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=9OeaSlTXCM8ViuTa60e1bzu7HkQI8QuNIe/o6vd5D10=; b=eqs765CYusWeKJfFvZ2+4mCR6Yl6O8lqFF5/FdXrl84D5jZwKCYVJYobJyhOkROaOf SG4BPWjrwhWlhcH72jJ5/J7e8R03pFj0zS1dkDMT/YVthVCBYByC06vi3lLejOc3mBvT oshUC2QGdIcrENDlkldVcKbWgaBZTZFP7zDOw= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=9OeaSlTXCM8ViuTa60e1bzu7HkQI8QuNIe/o6vd5D10=; b=tZak2jSTmZbpLOUm7uoyMcHXSj4om93UJvwy51ZKCITb6LuKBM6eIOIbXfv0QulAxj L5qxszP6aHVwc9qvonHAAxhrjdujEZJ6qkXhoAc1WlJ/e/YpzIiZaZqgeousmhWk4ka5 BE15wDd9EnzfFgUxZrJYj7QrP2C0AEynYIyuchWmPzmp/5huvuj8kqD290Ufb9paGEIi MQhiEnUWYm8RijnUhbi7+VdJs+cj0UZsCPTkrYc1ORjVBIlLKH8iHuKL0WVKV5kY/8Dy EgMZtOG8ItGCTyPzcLq1aqwPP+Ibr6Tq9wUPBi+xv+wCrtxffxsjrVQ2nlaPTTs2q+2t Eweg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWI3t0pI4tD3QpO5MbQeKYj7Y7wO7scf271RPPhjvR3aq/XNh2U aNxCxAUoU2EuQEwZJPLrnLzRQMwiVqdHihKyFOMsCQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwYwujI+yViC650HU3toqCCzetwAh3ReC8vpB170BF+/ixTBQ4kyTTC+D11DV0HvcUWRu+tEPUSwsZTwcLiiw0= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:24b:: with SMTP id 72mr19241634ioc.63.1582141550699; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 11:45:50 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200101175814.14144-1-amir73il@gmail.com> <20200101175814.14144-6-amir73il@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Miklos Szeredi Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 20:45:39 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] ovl: avoid possible inode number collisions with xino=on To: Amir Goldstein Cc: overlayfs Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-unionfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 4:59 PM Amir Goldstein wrote: > > > > Yeh, it's mostly the same. Branch ovl-ino is already rebased. > > > If you have no other comments, I'll prepare v2 and test it with 5.6-rc2. > > > > Thanks. I've already applied the patches leading up to this and just > > pushed to #overlayfs-next. > > > > OK, I'll rebase the rest on top of that. > While you are here, what do you think about: > ovl: enable xino automatically in more cases > > Do you agree with that minor change of behavior? I haven't thought about that yet. > > BTW, I see that overlayfs-next allows all remote fs as upper, > without extra restrictions. > I guess you are not too worried about implications? > Or intend to fix that up before the merge window? No, I'm not too worried, but if you send a patch, I'm not against restricting it either. Thanks, Miklos