[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1167388475.6106.51.camel@lade.trondhjem.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 11:34:35 +0100
From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>
To: Mikulas Patocka <mikulas@...ax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Benny Halevy <bhalevy@...asas.com>,
Jan Harkes <jaharkes@...cmu.edu>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
nfsv4@...f.org
Subject: Re: Finding hardlinks
On Thu, 2006-12-28 at 19:14 +0100, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> Why don't you rip off the support for colliding inode number from the
> kernel at all (i.e. remove iget5_locked)?
>
> It's reasonable to have either no support for colliding ino_t or full
> support for that (including syscalls that userspace can use to work with
> such filesystem) --- but I don't see any point in having half-way support
> in kernel as is right now.
What would ino_t have to do with inode numbers? It is only used as a
hash table lookup. The inode number is set in the ->getattr() callback.
Cheers
Trond
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists