[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJfpegvznUGTYxxTzB5QQHWtNrCfSkWvGscacfZ67Gn+6XoD8w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2024 15:28:18 +0200
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>,
Alexander Aring <alex.aring@...il.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2] fhandle: expose u64 mount id to name_to_handle_at(2)
On Tue, 28 May 2024 at 15:24, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 02:04:16PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> > Can you please explain how opening an fd based on a handle returned from
> > name_to_handle_at() and not using a mount file descriptor for
> > open_by_handle_at() would work?
>
> Same as NFS file handles:
>
> name_to_handle_at returns a handle that includes a file system
> identifier.
>
> open_by_handle_at looks up the superblock based on that identifier.
The open file needs a specific mount, holding the superblock is not sufficient.
Thanks,
Miklos
Powered by blists - more mailing lists