Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 10 Oct 2003 01:26:57 -0400 | Subject | Re: statfs() / statvfs() syscall ballsup... | From | Trond Myklebust <> |
| |
>>>>> " " == Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org> writes:
> - are dnotify / lease / lock reliable indicators on this filesystem? > (i.e. dnotify is reliable on all local filesystems, but > not over any of the remote ones AFAIK).
Belongs in fcntl()... Just return ENOLCK if someone tries to set a lease or a directory notification on an NFS file...
> - is stat() reliable (local filesystems and many remote) or > potentially out of date without open/close (NFS due to > attribute cacheing)
There are many possible cache consistency models out there. Consider for instance AFS connected/disconnected modes, NFSv4 delegations or CIFS shares. How are you going to distinguish between them all and how do you propose that applications make use of this information?
Cheers, Trond - 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/
| |