[lkml]   [2001]   [May]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [Re: Inodes]
Alexander Viro wrote:
> On Mon, 14 May 2001, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > Correct. At least at one time it used the offset of the directory entry
> > when that particular inode was last "seen" by the kernel... meaning that
> > when it finally dropped out of the inode cache, it would change inode
> > numbers. I thought that was a reasonable (by no means perfect, though)
> > solution to a very sticky problem.
> Unfortunately it wasn't a solution. Look: you open a file and rename it
> away. Now you want to create something in the old directory. Woops - can't
> use the old entry of our file, since we'll get icache conflict that way.
> So we get this lovely notion of reserved entries and there lies the
> madness. It gets especially nasty when you consider rmdir of something
> that used to be non-empty, but everything had been renamed away from it.
> And stayes open. Moreover, at every moment you need both the "original"
> location (inumber) and current one (for write_inode()). Better yet, you
> get to deal with opened files that are not renamed, but removed. Yes,
> all of that can be dealt with. The old driver didn't.

True enough.

<> at work, <> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:53    [W:0.044 / U:0.500 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site