Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 09:42:33 +0000
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: "Josef 'Jeff' Sipek" <jsipek@cs.sunysb.edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] fs/unionfs/: Don't duplicate the struct nameidata
Message-ID: <20070130094233.GA6972@infradead.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Josef 'Jeff' Sipek <jsipek@cs.sunysb.edu>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	akpm@osdl.org
References: <11701030631109-git-send-email-jsipek@cs.sunysb.edu> <11701030643398-git-send-email-jsipek@cs.sunysb.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <11701030643398-git-send-email-jsipek@cs.sunysb.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1011
Lines: 20

On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 03:37:42PM -0500, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:
> The only fields that we have to watch out for are the dentry and vfsmount.
> Additionally, this makes Unionfs gentler on the stack as nameidata is rather
> large.

That's onviously not true at all.  To handle any filesystems using intents
(e.g. NFSv4) you need to do much more.  Then again doing things correctly
doesn't seem to be interesting to the stackable filesystems crowd an this
problem has been constantly ignored over the last year, including merging
ecryptfs which has been broken in the same way.

Folks, if you want your stackable filesystem toys taken seriously you
need to fix these kind of issues instead of talking them away.  And yes,
this will involve some surgery to the VFS.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/