lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Dec]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Finding hardlinks
On Wed, 20 Dec 2006, Al Viro wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 05:50:11PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>> I don't see any problems with changing struct kstat. There would be
>> reservations against changing inode.i_ino though.
>>
>> So filesystems that have 64bit inodes will need a specialized
>> getattr() method instead of generic_fillattr().
>
> And they are already free to do so. And no, struct kstat doesn't need
> to be changed - it has u64 ino already.

If I return 64-bit values as ino_t, 32-bit programs will get EOVERFLOW on
stat attempt (even if they are not going to use st_ino in any way) --- I
know that POSIX specifies it, but the question is if it is useful.

What is the correct solution? Mount option that can differentiate between
32-bit colliding inode numbers and 64-bit non-colliding inode numbers? Or
is there any better idea.

Given the fact that glibc compiles anything by default with 32-bit ino_t,
I wonder if returning 64-bit inode number is possible at all.

Mikulas
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-12-31 16:05    [W:0.080 / U:0.168 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site