[lkml]   [2003]   [Mar]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] Improved inode number allocation for HTree
On Tue 11 Mar 03 20:39, Helge Hafting wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 02:41:06PM +0100, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > <wishful thinking>
> > Now that you mention it, just locking out create and rename during
> > directory traversal would eliminate the pain. Delete is easy enough to
> > handle during traversal. For a B-Tree, coalescing could simply be
> > deferred until the traversal is finished, so reading the directory in
> > physical storage order would be fine. Way, way cleaner than what we have
> > to do now.
> > </wishful thinking>
> Ok, so "rm" works. Then you have things like "mv *.c /usr/src" to worry
> about.

That's equivalent to ls, the shell expands it before doing any moving. You
can construct something more interesting with ls | xargs <something nasty>
into the same directory. Since the user is trying to shoot their foot off,
let the lock be recursive, and let them do that.

> ...someone evil still
> could cause trouble by keeping a traversal going forever, creating one
> dummy file and deleting one whenever it makes progress. The directory
> would get big, filled up with placeholders until some ulimit kicks in.
> Helge Hafting

It's not clear that's any more evil than things they can do already, eg,

seq 1 1000000 | xargs -l1 cp -a /usr

Welllll, this is all idle speculation anyway. Nobody's going to fix the
flaw this week, if it's even possible (I suspect it is).


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 13:33    [W:0.078 / U:1.612 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site