From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>,
overlayfs <linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] ovl: alllow remote upper
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2020 20:16:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJfpeguHjd2PMPxgbzFbdGM_7F6L4v+UGorjp2sMFtykR71QaA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ4uxhfV++XvO17ywftnhLoryYsynF=Y-pHCwmPdymc6naOFg@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 8:11 PM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 8:42 PM Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> > So as of now user space will get -ESTALE and that will get cleared when
> > user space retries after corresponding ovl dentry has been dropped from
> > cache (either dentry is evicted, cache is cleared forcibly or overlayfs
> > is remounted)? If yes, that kind of makes sense. Overlay does not expect
> > underlying layers to change and if a change it detected it is flagged
> > to user space (and overlayfs does not try to fix it)?
> >
>
> I looks like it. I don't really understand why overlayfs shouldn't drop
> the dentry on failure to revalidate. Maybe I am missing something.
I don't remember the exact reason. Maybe it's just that it makes
little sense to redo the lookup on remote change, but not on local
change...
Note: I'm not against detection of changing underlying layers and
redoing the lookup in that case. Maybe we can do it optionally
(because it could be expensive), but first there needs to be a use
case and we seem to lack that.
Thanks,
Miklos
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-04 19:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-31 11:50 [PATCH 0/4] ovl: allow virtiofs as upper Miklos Szeredi
2020-01-31 11:50 ` [PATCH 1/4] ovl: restructure dentry revalidation Miklos Szeredi
2020-01-31 11:50 ` [PATCH 2/4] ovl: separate detection of remote upper layer from stacked overlay Miklos Szeredi
2020-01-31 11:50 ` [PATCH 3/4] ovl: decide if revalidate needed on a per-dentry bases Miklos Szeredi
2020-01-31 14:53 ` Amir Goldstein
2020-01-31 15:15 ` Miklos Szeredi
2020-01-31 11:50 ` [PATCH 4/4] ovl: alllow remote upper Miklos Szeredi
2020-01-31 15:29 ` Amir Goldstein
2020-01-31 15:38 ` Miklos Szeredi
2020-01-31 15:50 ` Amir Goldstein
2020-01-31 16:05 ` Miklos Szeredi
2020-02-04 14:59 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-02-04 16:16 ` Miklos Szeredi
2020-02-04 17:02 ` Amir Goldstein
2020-02-04 18:42 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-02-04 19:11 ` Amir Goldstein
2020-02-04 19:16 ` Miklos Szeredi [this message]
2020-02-20 7:52 ` Amir Goldstein
2020-02-20 20:00 ` Amir Goldstein
2020-03-14 13:16 ` Amir Goldstein
2020-03-16 17:54 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-03-16 19:02 ` Amir Goldstein
2020-03-16 19:40 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-03-18 13:36 ` unionmount testsuite with upper virtiofs Amir Goldstein
2020-03-19 21:40 ` Vivek Goyal
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAJfpeguHjd2PMPxgbzFbdGM_7F6L4v+UGorjp2sMFtykR71QaA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mszeredi@redhat.com \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).