Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 22 Feb 1999 19:49:14 -0800 | From | Daniel Quinlan <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] inode generation numbers. |
| |
G Allen Morris <gam3@harpo.ixlabs.com> writes:
> NFS is in need of an inode generation number for correctness and > possibly some added security. The best way to do this is by adding > a u32 variable to struct inode.
H.J. Lu said:
>> 1. Mine adds i_timestamp to "struct inode" and let each file system decide >> what to do with it. If it doesn't support it in inode on disk, it can just >> reset the count. It means less than 5 line change per each file system. >> >> 2. Allen changes nfsd to access the ext2 internal directly bypass the VFS >> layer. You don't need to change other file systems if they don't support >> i_timestamp in inode on disk. But it looks very ugly to me.
Given what Linus says, perhaps the best solution is to do #2 for 2.2 in order to preserve module compatibility, and #1 for 2.3.
If we could do it in a way that the NFS filehandles remain the same going from 2.2 to 2.3 for at least ext2, it would be ideal, I think.
Having all of your filehandles go south on you just because your Linux NFS server was upgraded should happen as rarely as possible (never is best, but I agree that we need to add the generation number, and I don't know if we can add it without breaking filehandles once).
- Dan
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |