[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87ipb45914.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 13:39:35 +0900
From: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
To: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@...il.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, bfields@...ldses.org,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@...sung.com>,
Ravishankar N <ravi.n1@...sung.com>,
Amit Sahrawat <a.sahrawat@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] fat: allocate persistent inode numbers
Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@...il.com> writes:
>> I think we don't need this. Because FH and ino is not necessary to have
>> relation.
>>
>> Can we re-introduce ->encode_fh() handler, and export i_pos again? With
>> this, I think we can get i_pos correctly. Otherwise, ino may not contain
>> all bits of i_pos.
> I already tried to fix this issue using encode_fh without stable ino before.
> But I reached conclusion that we should use stable inode number.
>
> e.g. If we rebuild inode number using i_pos of fh, inode number is
> changed by i_unique.
> And It is not match with inode number of FH on NFS client. So estale
> error will happen.
What is problem if i_ino + i_generation is not match? I think, even if
those didn't match, i_pos in FH should resolve issue, no?
--
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
--
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