SEARCH  

NEWS

2010.10.06:11:36:28
Apple zapłaci 625,5 mln USD za naruszenie patentów?
Sąd uznał winę firmy Stevea Jobsa i nakazał jej wypłatę ogromnego odszkodowania. Ta jednak uważa, że racja jest po jej stronie i zapowiada dalszą walkę.

 

147328534702_588460007890Jan Blunck
I think it is wrong to unconditionally take the lock before calling atomic_dec_and_test() in _atomic_dec_and_lock(). This will deadlock in situation where it is known that the counter will now reach

 
116922204232_525360007551Jan Blunck
Creates the proper struct union_mount when mounting something into a union. If the topmost filesystem isnt capable of handling the white-out filetype it could only be mount read-only. Signed-off-by:

 
179922094146_507860007479Jan Blunck
From: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx Add support for fallthru entries to tmpfs. Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx --- fs/dcache.c | 4 ++- fs/libfs

 
121626324157_590260007503Jan Blunck
Honor the S_OPAQUE flag in the union path lookup. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxx Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx --- fs/namei.c | 17 ++++++++++++++-

 
130622634349_573060007238Jan Blunck
Add per mountpoint flag for Union Mount support. You need additional patches to util-linux for that to work - see: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/util-linux-ng/val/util-linux-ng.git Signed-off-

 
141723414090_511960007561Jan Blunck
This patch changes real_lookup() into returning a struct path. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxx Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx --- fs/namei.c | 82 ++

 
100923944782_524260007949Jan Blunck
Simply white-out a given directory entry. This functionality is usually used in the sense of unlink. Therefore the given dentry can still be in-use and contains an in-use inode. The filesystems inode

 
179424454158_594060007997Jan Blunck
Add some additional checks when mounting something into an union. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxx Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@xxxxxxx Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora (He

 
141827404628_557560007392Jan Blunck
From: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx Define the fallthru dcache flag and file system op. Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx --- include/linux/dcache.h

 
107829474656_542860007524Jan Blunck
From: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx Define the fallthru dcache flag and file system op. Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx --- include/linux/dcache.h

 
166620934866_575760007090Jan Blunck
This patch adds support for whiteouts to tmpfs. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxx Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaur

 
131722224484_509960007130Jan Blunck
This patch adds support for whiteouts to tmpfs. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxx Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora (Henson) <vaur

 
104822584576_520660007099Jan Blunck
The userspace isnt ready for handling another filetype. Therefore this patch lets readdir() and others skip over the whiteout directory entries they might find. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <j.blunc

 
120226154839_583160007480Jan Blunck
The userspace isnt ready for handling another filetype. Therefore this patch lets readdir() and others skip over the whiteout directory entries they might find. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <j.blunc

 
122322684427_587960007103Jan Blunck
Break early when somebody tries to rehash an already hashed dentry. Otherwise this leads to interesting corruptions in the dcache hash table later on. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxx

 
140323624197_526860007410Jan Blunck
Break early when somebody tries to rehash an already hashed dentry. Otherwise this leads to interesting corruptions in the dcache hash table later on. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxx

 
135924364633_584360007097Arnd Bergmann
Jan Blunck: +Rename across different levels of the union is implemented as a copy-up +operation for regular files. Rename of directories simply returns EXDEV, the +same as if we tried to renam

 
197425834355_555060007552Arnd Bergmann
Jan Blunck: +Rename across different levels of the union is implemented as a copy-up +operation for regular files. Rename of directories simply returns EXDEV, the +same as if we tried to renam

 
164929924166_548860007357Valerie Aurora
Arnd Bergmann: Right, but that is consistent with how the kernel would treat a rename from one mount point to another, and tools like mv can handle this in user space. Yes, that is the descri

 
196820454625_539560007321Valerie Aurora
Arnd Bergmann: Right, but that is consistent with how the kernel would treat a rename from one mount point to another, and tools like mv can handle this in user space. Yes, that is the descri

 
149823284683_569560007802Valerie Aurora
Valerie Aurora: Ah, we did implement that in an earlier version. I dont know if we dropped the patch by accident or on purpose, but the original version is below. We will either put this fea

 
110529564237_573860007772Valerie Aurora
Valerie Aurora: Ah, we did implement that in an earlier version. I dont know if we dropped the patch by accident or on purpose, but the original version is below. We will either put this fea

 
183627724354_519060007143Valerie Aurora
On May 18, 2009 16:40 -0400, Valerie Aurora wrote: @@ -705,8 +707,9 @@ struct ext2_dir_entry_2 { #define EXT2_FT_FIFO 5 #define EXT2_FT_SOCK 6 #define EXT2_FT_SYMLINK 7 +#define EXT2

 
174229714135_590960007958Valerie Aurora
On May 18, 2009 16:40 -0400, Valerie Aurora wrote: @@ -705,8 +707,9 @@ struct ext2_dir_entry_2 { #define EXT2_FT_FIFO 5 #define EXT2_FT_SOCK 6 #define EXT2_FT_SYMLINK 7 +#define EXT2

 
126524264003_589160007928Jan Blunck
On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation. Traditionally the mount operation is opaque, which means that the content of the moun

 
121223194255_589560007852Jan Blunck
On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation. Traditionally the mount operation is opaque, which means that the content of the moun

 
169621194808_593460007606Jan Blunck
On Tue, 19 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: The directory in the topmost filesystem is created during lookup. The contents of the directory isnt copied up presistently at that point in time. Therefo

 
170526934377_505960007698Jan Blunck
On Tue, 19 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: The directory in the topmost filesystem is created during lookup. The contents of the directory isnt copied up presistently at that point in time. Therefo

 
120326254668_533860007126Jan Blunck
On Tuesday 19 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: So this means that the topmost branch always needs to be writable, right?  It isnt possible to make a union of two iso9660 filesystems, for

 
129628004552_529960007373Jan Blunck
On Tuesday 19 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: So this means that the topmost branch always needs to be writable, right?  It isnt possible to make a union of two iso9660 filesystems, for

 
122629024693_548260007707Jan Blunck
On Tuesday 19 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: On Tue, May 19, Arnd Bergmann wrote: This would work, but youd have to do this for each file system if you want to be able to use it as the top of

 
133424934826_514160007683Miklos Szeredi
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 11:48:00AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation. Traditionally t

 
174821314375_512460007258Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 11:05:27AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: On Tue, 19 May 2009, Valerie Aurora wrote: As Jan said, readdir() of read-only unioned file systems works with a tmpfs top la

 
182323944883_549060007417Jan Blunck
On Tuesday 19 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: On Tue, May 19, Arnd Bergmann wrote: This would work, but youd have to do this for each file system if you want to be able to use it as the top of

 
161720294216_516960007906Valerie Aurora
On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation. Is there any chance this will support NFS? I can union-mount tmpfs over nfs mounted fs, bu

 
154325554808_523560007604Miklos Szeredi
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 11:48:00AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation. Traditionally t

 
194223714096_576760007523Valerie Aurora
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009, Valerie Aurora wrote: On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 02:54:19PM +0200, Jan Rekorajski wrote: On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS bas

 
145022604655_582660007846Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 11:05:27AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: On Tue, 19 May 2009, Valerie Aurora wrote: As Jan said, readdir() of read-only unioned file systems works with a tmpfs top la

 
108322074240_596760007974Valerie Aurora
On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation. Is there any chance this will support NFS? I can union-mount tmpfs over nfs mounted fs, bu

 
138323144002_560060007330Valerie Aurora
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009, Valerie Aurora wrote: On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 12:44:06AM +0200, Jan Rekorajski wrote: On Mon, 08 Jun 2009, Valerie Aurora wrote: Youll get -EBUSY on the second

 
150520254886_531260007923Valerie Aurora
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009, Valerie Aurora wrote: On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 02:54:19PM +0200, Jan Rekorajski wrote: On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS bas

 
191722024293_501360007807Valerie Aurora
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 18:08 +0200, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation. Awesome work, this may just get us out of a tight spot with our LiveCD. A

 
153724204066_519160007451Valerie Aurora
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009, Valerie Aurora wrote: On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 12:44:06AM +0200, Jan Rekorajski wrote: On Mon, 08 Jun 2009, Valerie Aurora wrote: Youll get -EBUSY on the second

 
103623294658_527760007356Jens Axboe
Hi, This is the fourth version of this patchset. Chances since v3: - Dropped a prep patch, it has been included in mainline since. - Add a work-to-do list to the bdi. This is struct bdi_work. Each

 
125026804670_525360007153Jens Axboe
btrfs puts dirty inodes on there, so it must register a thread to handle them. Also fixes failure to check bdi_init() return value, and bad inherit of - capabilities flags from the default bdi. Sign

 
158427854179_546960007440Valerie Aurora
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 18:08 +0200, Jan Blunck wrote: Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation. Awesome work, this may just get us out of a tight spot with our LiveCD. A

 
139120134642_568560007612Jens Axboe
Also a debugging aid. We want to catch dirty inodes being added to backing devices that dont do writeback. Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx --- fs/fs-writeback.c |

 
149225644031_555960007277Jens Axboe
Hi, This is the fourth version of this patchset. Chances since v3: - Dropped a prep patch, it has been included in mainline since. - Add a work-to-do list to the bdi. This is struct bdi_work. Each

 
100927924606_566860007903Jens Axboe
Not meant for inclusion, just to monitor what is going on while testing this stuff. Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx --- mm/backing-dev.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 
102323194582_569460007862Jens Axboe
btrfs puts dirty inodes on there, so it must register a thread to handle them. Also fixes failure to check bdi_init() return value, and bad inherit of - capabilities flags from the default bdi. Sign

 

 

home   |    register   |    login