Posted Jan 13, 2007 0:33 UTC (Sat) by giraffedata
In reply to: Unionfs
Parent article: Unionfs
later messages in the thread indicate that the warning is (somewhat) intentionally overstating the risk of an oops
Do you mean the warning is a lie and it is not in fact possible by design to oops the kernel by modifying an underlying filesystem?
Because that's the only way it's sensible. You cannot oops the kernel by writing to /dev/hda1 while an ext3 filesystem on /dev/hda1 is mounted. You can trash unlimited amounts of data, but as the filesystem is external to the kernel, the kernel is robust to whatever bits it might read from it at any time.
to post comments)