[lkml]   [1997]   [Nov]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: knfsd and system crashes

Alan Cox writes:
> [somebody unknown]

>> fs operations expect to get dentries with a specific relationship,
>> and perform dcache operations on the dentries. For example,
>> the rename operation results in the dentries changing names and
>> parents, which could result in the synthetic dentries getting
>> mixed up with the real ones.
> Perhaps we should revert the kernel back to inodes and throw
> dentries out at this point then. If we can't fix them then we
> have to find an alternative before 2.2

I've been thinking about that, but I didn't want to mention
it because people have worked so hard on the dentries.
I've long wanted to ask: Were dentries worth the trouble?

[damn standards... hard links cause so much trouble.
At least we don't have to support them on directories.]

If dentries are doomed to fail, then it would be good to
just admit it. There is no shame in reverting to inodes.
The dentries are a great idea, but perhaps better suited
for a non-POSIX system.

So, what do the VFS hackers think? Can dentries work?
Would throwing them out be harder at this point?

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:40    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans