[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20061207005619.GA12320@filer.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 19:56:19 -0500
From: Josef Sipek <jsipek@....cs.sunysb.edu>
To: David Chinner <dgc@....com>
Cc: Nikolai Joukov <kolya@...sunysb.edu>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Secure Deletion and Trash-Bin Support for Ext4
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 08:11:00PM +1100, David Chinner wrote:
> They are defined but unused in 2.6.19, right? I can't see anywhere
> in the 2.6.19 ext2/3/4/reiser trees that actually those flags,
> including setting and retrieving them from disk. JFS i can see
> sets, clears and retreives them, but not the fielsystems you
> mention. Though I might just be blind..... ;)
>
> If all we need to add to XFS is support for those flags, then XFS
> support would be trivial to add.
>
> Oh, damn. I take that back. We're almost out of flag space in the on
> disk inode - these two flags would use the last 2 flag bits so this
> may require an on disk inode format change in XFS. This will be
> a little more complex than I first thought, but not impossible
> as we already support two on-disk inode format versions.
Hrm. I was toying around with the idea of using a flag to mark inodes as
whiteouts (similar to what BSD does) for Unionfs. I remember that Jan Blunck
tried similar thing in his implementation of VFS unionfs mounts.
I am not entirely convinced that whiteout inode flag is the right way to do
things, but I'm just raising this now as I wouldn't want to wait for new
ondisk format for XFS to say that Unionfs supports XFS. (Assuming that it is
the right approach.) ;-)
Josef "Jeff" Sipek.
--
I already backed up the box once, I can do it again!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists