> another inode after the trunc op would break unix semantics. In order to
> work, you'd have to use a new inode (in .undelete, of course), copy, then do
> the actual trunc call.
> This would make truncation expensive, whereas before it was pretty fast.
> Modifying unlink will probably suffice.
You would need to hook the truncate/unlink paths in the file system. If
you are doing it within the fs it becomes cheap (at least for ext2) - as
you can simply reassign the data blocks to a new inode, stuff the new inode
into the magic "stuff we deleted" directory and continue.
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 07 2002 - 21:00:33 EST