Recommend native overlayfs instead of fuse-overlayfs?

[StarpTech]

Hi, according to https://www.redhat.com/sysadmin/podman-rootless-overlay is it still recommended to use mount_program = "/usr/bin/fuse-overlayfs" when Kernel 5.13 has shipped native support?
Anything else to consider except clearing the container storage and comment # mount_program = "/usr/bin/fuse-overlayfs"?

podman/contrib/podmanimage/stable/Containerfile

Lines 38 to 43 in 34d5168

	RUN sed -e 's|^#mount_program|mount_program|g' \
	-e '/additionalimage.*/a "/var/lib/shared",' \
	-e 's|^mountopt[[:space:]]*=.*$|mountopt = "nodev,fsync=0"|g' \
	/usr/share/containers/storage.conf \
	> /etc/containers/storage.conf

[mheon]

I don't think that blog says we still recommend fuse-overlayfs when native Overlay is available; we prefer native overlay unless you have a good reason to continue to use fuse-overlay (it does some things we don't have kernel support for, at least last I checked; UID mapping would be the most notable).

Commenting the mount_program line will indeed be sufficient to swap the driver.

[rhatdan]

The problem we have is changing this now, means that older versions of Podman will break.

At 5.0 we should probably make the change to drop fuse-overlayfs from inside of the container. Or can we do this now @giuseppe

[vrothberg]

Isn't c/storage clever enough to figure out using native overlayfs on its own?

[StarpTech]

Yes, it should if we comment out the driver overwrite. My question is more from a consumer perspective. I'm not familiar with all the internals. I just want to set it up in the best way :)

[rhatdan]

Open a PR to make the change then we can see if anyone on older OS compain.

[StarpTech]

(it does some things we don't have kernel support for, at least last I checked; UID mapping would be the most notable).

This is why asked. I wanted to verify if the native overlay is a drop-in replacement. I couldn't find anything about this in the repository. All examples use the fuse overlay. Thanks!