Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754901Ab1CVTAN (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Mar 2011 15:00:13 -0400 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:50939 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751705Ab1CVTAF (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Mar 2011 15:00:05 -0400 Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 19:00:02 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Miklos Szeredi Cc: Linus Torvalds , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, apw@canonical.com, nbd@openwrt.org, neilb@suse.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6 v7] overlay filesystem - request for inclusion Message-ID: <20110322190002.GW22723@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20110322152602.053930811@szeredi.hu> <20110322183919.GV22723@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 924 Lines: 26 On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 07:58:17PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Al Viro wrote: > > > > > > Locking analysis would be really nice; AFAICS, it violates locking order > > > when called from e.g. ->setattr() > > Locking order is always: > > -> overlayfs locks > -> upper fs locks > -> lower fs locks > > So it's really pretty simple and easy to validate. In which *order* on the upper fs? > Protection is exactly as for userspace callers. AFAICT. Pardon? You traverse the chain of ancestors; fine, but who says it stays anywhere near being relevant as you go? -- 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/