Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 04 May 2001 16:08:22 -0400 | From | Chris Mason <> | Subject | Re: Maximum files per Directory |
| |
On Friday, May 04, 2001 01:15:22 PM -0600 Andreas Dilger <adilger@turbolinux.com> wrote:
> Chris writes: >> On Tuesday, May 01, 2001 04:57:02 PM -0600 Andreas Dilger >> <adilger@turbolinux.com> wrote: >> > I see that reiserfs plays some tricks with the directory i_nlink count. >> > If you exceed 64536 links in a directory, it reverts to "1" and no >> > longer tracks the link count. >> >> Correct. The link count isn't used at all when deciding if the directory >> is empty (we use the size instead), so we can just lie to VFS if someone >> tries to make tons of subdirs. > > For that matter, ext2 doesn't use the link count on directories to > determine if they are empty either, so it shouldn't be too hard to do the > same with the ext2 indexed-directory code. Is there a reason that > reiserfs chose to have "large number of directories" represented by "1" > and not "LINK_MAX+1"? >
find and a few others consider a link count of 1 to mean there is no link count tracking being done.
-chris
- 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/
|  |