From: Josef Sipek <jsipek@fsl.cs.sunysb.edu>
To: Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Jan Blunck <jblunck@suse.de>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
hch@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 12/26] ext2 white-out support
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 14:44:05 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070801184405.GA18405@filer.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1185981810.18007.14.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com>
On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 10:23:29AM -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 13:11 -0400, Josef Sipek wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 07:00:12PM +0200, Jan Blunck wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 31, Josef Sipek wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 06:13:35PM +0200, Jan Blunck wrote:
> > > > > Introduce white-out support to ext2.
> > > >
> > > > I think storing whiteouts on the branches is wrong. It creates all sort of
> > > > nasty cases when people actually try to use unioning. Imagine a (no-so
> > > > unlikely) scenario where you have 2 unions, and they share a branch. If you
> > > > create a whiteout in one union on that shared branch, the whiteout magically
> > > > affects the other union as well! Whiteouts are a union-level construct, and
> > > > therefore storing them at the branch level is wrong.
> > >
> > > So you think that just because you mounted the filesystem somewhere else it
> > > should look different? This is what sharing is all about. If you share a
> > > filesystem you also share the removal of objects.
> >
> > The removal happens at the union level, not the branch level. Say you have:
> >
> > /a/
> > /b/foo
> > /c/foo
> >
> > And you mount /u1 as a union of {a,b}, and /u2 as union of {a,c}.
>
> Who does this? I'm assuming that a is the "top" layer. Aren't union
> mounts typically about sharing lower layers and having a separate rw
> layer for each union mount?
Alright not the greatest of examples, there is something to be said about
symmetry, so...let me try again :)
/a/
/b/bar (whiteout for bar)
/c/foo/qwerty
Now, let's mount a union of {a,b,c}, and we'll see:
$ find /u
/u
/u/foo
/u/foo/qwerty
$ mv /u/foo /u/bar
Now what? How do you rename? Do you rename in the same branch (assuming it
is rw)? If you do, you'll get:
$ find /u
/u
Oops! There's a whiteout in /b that hides the directory in /c -- rename(2)
shouldn't make directory subtrees disappear.
There are two ways to solve this:
1) "cp -r" the entire subtree being renamed to highest-priority branch, and
rename there (you might have to recreate a series of directories to have a
place to "cp" to...so you got "cp -r" _AND_ "mkdir -p"-like code in the VFS!
1/2 a :) )
2) Don't store whiteouts within branches. This makes it really easy to
rename and remove the whiteout.
Sure, you could try to rename in-place and remove the whiteout, but what if
you have:
/a/
/b/bar (whiteout)
/c/bar/blah
/d/foo/qwerty
$ mv /u/foo /u/bar
You can't just remove the whiteout, because that'd uncover the whited-out
directory bar in /c.
Josef 'Jeff' Sipek.
--
Bad pun of the week: The formula 1 control computer suffered from a race
condition
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-01 18:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 65+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-07-30 16:13 [RFC 00/26] VFS based Union Mount (V2) Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 01/26] [PATCH 14/18] shmem: convert to using splice instead of sendfile() Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 02/26] VFS: Export dput_path() and path_to_nameidata() Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 03/26] VFS: Make lookup_hash() return a struct path Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 04/26] VFS: Make lookup_create() " Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 05/26] VFS: cache_lookup() cleanup Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 06/26] VFS: Make real_lookup() return a struct path Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 07/26] VFS: Introduce dput() variante that maintains a kill-list Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 08/26] VFS: Export lives_below_in_same_fs() Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 09/26] linux/stat.h: Add the filetype white-out Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 10/26] VFS white-out handling Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 11/26] tmpfs white-out support Jan Blunck
2007-08-01 15:13 ` Hugh Dickins
2007-08-02 2:48 ` Matt Mackall
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 12/26] ext2 " Jan Blunck
2007-07-31 3:45 ` Theodore Tso
2007-07-31 7:44 ` Jan Blunck
2007-07-31 8:32 ` Andreas Dilger
2007-07-31 9:08 ` Jan Blunck
2007-07-31 10:53 ` Theodore Tso
2007-08-02 19:31 ` Pavel Machek
2007-07-31 16:36 ` Josef Sipek
2007-07-31 17:00 ` Jan Blunck
2007-07-31 17:11 ` Josef Sipek
2007-08-01 15:23 ` Dave Kleikamp
2007-08-01 18:44 ` Josef Sipek [this message]
2007-08-01 19:10 ` Dave Kleikamp
2007-08-01 19:33 ` Josef Sipek
2007-08-01 19:52 ` Dave Kleikamp
2007-08-01 22:06 ` Erez Zadok
2007-08-02 12:05 ` Jan Blunck
2007-08-02 11:55 ` Jan Blunck
2007-08-02 17:50 ` Jörn Engel
2007-08-02 18:15 ` Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
2007-08-02 5:24 ` Ph. Marek
2007-08-02 12:12 ` Jan Blunck
2007-08-02 10:26 ` Jan Blunck
2007-08-01 10:00 ` Hans-Peter Jansen
2007-08-01 11:43 ` Josef Sipek
2007-08-01 18:01 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-07-31 17:03 ` Mark Williamson
2007-07-31 17:16 ` Josef Sipek
2007-08-01 17:58 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-08-01 18:03 ` Josef Sipek
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 13/26] ext3 whiteout support Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 14/26] union-mount: Documentation Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 15/26] union-mount: Add union-mount mount flag Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 16/26] union-mount: Introduce union_mount structure Jan Blunck
2007-08-06 5:57 ` Bharata B Rao
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 17/26] union-mount: Drive the union cache via dcache Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 18/26] union-mount: Changes to the namespace handling Jan Blunck
2007-08-08 10:10 ` Bharata B Rao
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 19/26] union-mount: Make lookup work for union-mounted file systems Jan Blunck
2007-08-09 5:42 ` Bharata B Rao
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 20/26] union-mount: Simple union-mount readdir implementation Jan Blunck
2007-08-06 11:08 ` Bharata B Rao
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 21/26] union-mount: in-kernel file copy between union mounted filesystems Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 22/26] union-mount: white-out changes for copy-on-open Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 23/26] union-mount: copyup on rename Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 24/26] union-mount: dont report EROFS for union mounts Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 25/26] union-mount: Debug Infrastructure Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 16:13 ` [RFC 26/26] union-mount: Debug code Jan Blunck
2007-07-30 18:23 ` [RFC 00/26] VFS based Union Mount (V2) Al Boldi
2007-08-02 6:49 ` Bharata B Rao
2007-08-02 10:17 ` Jan Blunck
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=20070801184405.GA18405@filer.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu \
--to=jsipek@fsl.cs.sunysb.edu \
--cc=bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jblunck@suse.de \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®