Re: fuse+aufs

2007-07-22 Thread sfjro
Tomas M: Now FUSE becomes very special thing to me and aufs. For users, aufs will call vfs_getattr in case of the branch is FUSE. I prefer to just mention this problem in aufs documentation, so people will 'stat' a fuse-based filesystem's mountpoint before adding it as aufs branch.

Re: fuse+aufs

2007-07-19 Thread sfjro
Miklos Szeredi: But I could understand that you are still asserting getattr is necessary even in the cases of may_open() or something, and that is a VFS lookup bug. Am I right? Yes :) It is very hard for me that they are VFS lookup bug. If they are really VFS lookup bug, you or Tomas

Re: fuse+aufs

2007-07-19 Thread sfjro
Miklos Szeredi: It is very hard for me that they are VFS lookup bug. Why? What has the sticky check or the O_NOATIME check to do with aufs? If it was VFS bug, it must be a generic problem, not specific to aufs. While you have mentioned about the race problem, the permission check in

Re: fuse+aufs

2007-07-19 Thread Tomas M
Now FUSE becomes very special thing to me and aufs. For users, aufs will call vfs_getattr in case of the branch is FUSE. I prefer to just mention this problem in aufs documentation, so people will 'stat' a fuse-based filesystem's mountpoint before adding it as aufs branch. I don't

Re: fuse+aufs

2007-07-19 Thread sfjro
Tomas M: I prefer to just mention this problem in aufs documentation, so people will 'stat' a fuse-based filesystem's mountpoint before adding it as aufs branch. It is not enough since Miklos thinks getattr is necessary for every VFS lookup. Of course, I don't agree. I don't understand

Re: [fuse-devel] fuse+aufs

2007-07-19 Thread sfjro
Miklos Szeredi: You misunderstand. What I think is: To be able to correctly perform permission checks based on cached inode attributes, those attributes may need to be refreshed before making the permission checks. You seem to be replacing the problem. The problem is more generic, not

fuse+aufs

2007-07-18 Thread Tomas M
I was speaking with FUSE developer and he thinks aufs should be modified a bit. Here is the important part for aufs: Subject: Re: [fuse-devel] fuse - uninitialized root inode Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 17:04:45 +0200 From: Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: fuse+aufs

2007-07-18 Thread sfjro
Miklos Szeredi: Basically yes. Accessing the file type in inode-i_mode is OK, but for all other fields getattr() needs to be called. If it is true, current linux lookup routines are totally broken since they check inode.i_mode so often without vfs_getattr(). They only check the file