From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S967807AbXG3SXl (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:23:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S966735AbXG3SXc (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:23:32 -0400 Received: from [212.12.190.96] ([212.12.190.96]:33779 "EHLO raad.intranet" rhost-flags-FAIL-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S966466AbXG3SXa (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:23:30 -0400 From: Al Boldi To: Jan Blunck Subject: Re: [RFC 00/26] VFS based Union Mount (V2) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:23:24 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 Cc: Bharata B Rao , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20070730161323.100048969@weierstrass.suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20070730161323.100048969@weierstrass.suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200707302123.24542.a1426z@gawab.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jan Blunck wrote: > Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation. Unlike > the traditional mount which hides the contents of the mount point, union > mounts present the merged view of the mount point and the mounted > filesytem. Great! > Recent changes: > - brand new union structure no longer tied to the dentryn, now works with > bind mounts > - generic part of the whiteout patches extracted > - introduces MS_WHITEOUT to make the white-out patches independant of the > union-mount stuff > - uses a singleton whiteout inode for the tmpfs filesystem (I need to fix > this for ext2/3, too) > - renaming files on unions uses copyup now I wonder if this copyup functionality could be generalized to induce CoW when modifying hard-linked files. Does that sound feasible? > - rewrote the union mount debugging code: it is now debugfs/relay based. > - random cleanups > > I'm able to compile the kernel with this patches applied on a 3 layer > union mount with the seperate layers bind mounted to different locations. > I haven't done any performance tests since I think there is a more > important topic ahead: better readdir() support. What about the umount oops? Did that get fixed? > This series is against 2.6.22-rc6-mm1. Things as big and important like this should probably also be diff'd against mainline, to increase testing input. Thanks! -- Al