lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] cowlinks v2
    On Fri, 2 April 2004 20:23:58 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
    >
    > > Then you link()...
    >
    > INODE123 Usage count = 2, pointer to cowid 567
    > COWID 567: Usage count = 3
    > INODE124 Usage count = 2, pointer to cowid 567
    > INODE125 Usage count = 2, pointer to cowid 567
    >
    > Now, if I write to any inode with has cowid, data have to be copied,
    > and pointer to cowid deleted from that inode .

    Ok, you win. Next time I get scare, I should ask you first. :)

    In a single picture, links currently look like this:

    Symlink can point to inodes or cowlinks or hardlinks
    Hardlink can point to inodes or cowlinks
    Cowlink can point to inodes

    I like it.

    Not sure about the current count, but it looks like most people favor
    the indirect approach now.

    Jörn

    --
    "Security vulnerabilities are here to stay."
    -- Scott Culp, Manager of the Microsoft Security Response Center, 2001
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:02    [W:0.022 / U:0.224 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site