Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210818133400.830078-1-mszeredi@redhat.com> <YR0YiSP3DliPCPWF@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <YR0YiSP3DliPCPWF@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>
From:   Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Date:   Wed, 18 Aug 2021 17:03:27 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJfpegsSQv5im4KRN3EfryyNy6aq9eRPPgL_K-1Knj+qtXiaQg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] allow overlayfs to do RCU lookups
To:     Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        overlayfs <linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 18 Aug 2021 at 16:27, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 03:33:58PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > I'd really like to fix this in some form, but not getting any response
> > [1][2][3].
> >
> > Al, Linus, can you please comment?
> >
> > I'm happy to take this through the overlayfs tree, just need an ACK for the
> > VFS API change.
>
> Looks reasonable enough; I'm not too happy about yet another place LOOKUP_...
> details get tangled into, though.  Do we want it to be more than just a
> bool rcu?

I'd be fine with that change.   Calling with false/true is less
descriptive than calling with 0/LOOKUP_RCU but I guess we can leave
the actual calls to use the latter?

Thanks,
Miklos