Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965906AbXIGOjV (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Sep 2007 10:39:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965470AbXIGOjK (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Sep 2007 10:39:10 -0400 Received: from sovereign.computergmbh.de ([85.214.69.204]:52860 "EHLO sovereign.computergmbh.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965508AbXIGOjJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Sep 2007 10:39:09 -0400 Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2007 16:39:08 +0200 (CEST) From: Jan Engelhardt To: Bharata B Rao cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, hch@infradead.org, Jan Blunck , "Josef 'Jeff' Sipek" Subject: Re: [RFC] Union Mount: Readdir approaches In-Reply-To: <20070907054618.GD1692@in.ibm.com> Message-ID: References: <20070907054618.GD1692@in.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 958 Lines: 26 On Sep 7 2007 11:16, Bharata B Rao wrote: >Questions >--------- >The main problem in getting a sane readdir() implementation in Union Mount >is the fact that a single vfs object (file structure) is used to represent >more than one (underlying) directory. Because of this, it is unclear as to >how lseek(2) needs to behave in such cases. > >First of all, should we even expect a sane lseek(2) on union mounted >directories ? If not, will the Approach 2, which works uniformly for >all filesystem types be acceptable ? Filesystems also have this problem. http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/7/107 If you ask me, we should entriely do away with the telldir/seekdir blackmagic (and add appropriate compat code). Jan -- - 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/