Messages in this thread | | | From | Neil Brown <> | Date | Sat, 29 Jul 2006 15:29:33 +1000 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] knfsd: Fix stale file handle problem with subtree_checking. |
| |
On Friday July 28, bfields@fieldses.org wrote: > > It'd be great if we could deprecate subtree checking some day in the > distant future....
The first step would be to stop it from being the default (as Trond has suggested a number of times :-)
How about this. I release a 1.0.10 shortly which addresses some 'portlist' related breakage and prints a nasty warning if you have neither subtree_check or no_subtree_check, but still defaults to subtree_check.
Then the next release will be 1.1.0 which prints the same warning, but defaults the other way - and probably removed the warning if you include neither sync not async.
That should at least get subtree_check to be used less.
> > Would it be feasible to add filesystem support for some sort of > subvolume-like thing that acted like a mountpoint (in the sense that it > restricted hardlinks and renames) but that didn't require setting aside > a separate partition? I imagine that'd probably do what most people > exporting subtrees want without forcing us to do dubious tricks with > filehandles.
I think it is a great idea for a 'filesystem' to support multiple independent file-trees within the one storage set, which is roughly what you are saying I think (though probably not quite).
However I suspect that most people don't actually want subtrees. They just get it as the default. It isn't something that I would have implemented if I hadn't inherited the requirement, and no other OS that I know of provides that particular semantic.
Maybe we should make it non-default, and then in one year, subtly break it (maybe reintroduce this bug) and see if anyone notices :-) (No, that's unethical, I wouldn't do that - really ....)
NeilBrown - 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/
| |