Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] fat: eliminate orphaned inode number allocation

[J. Bruce Fields]

On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 04:02:13AM +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
> "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 02:07:40AM +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
> >> OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >> 
> >> > Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >> >
> >> >> From: Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >>
> >> >> Maintain a list of inode(i_pos) numbers of orphaned inodes (i.e the
> >> >> inodes that have been unlinked but still having open file
> >> >> descriptors).At file/directory creation time, skip using such i_pos
> >> >> values.Removal of the i_pos from the list is done during inode eviction.
> >> >
> >> > What happens if the directory (has busy entries) was completely removed?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > And Al's point is important for NFS too. If you want stable ino for NFS,
> >> > you never can't change it.
> >> 
> >> s/never can't/never can/
> >
> > If vfat exports aren't fixable, maybe we should just remove that
> > feature?
> >
> > I'm afraid that having unfixable half-working vfat exports is just an
> > attractive nuisance that causes users and developers to waste their
> > time....
> 
> In historically, it was introduced by Neil Brown, when nfs export
> interface was rewritten (I'm not sure what was intended).
> 
> Personally, I'm ok to remove it though, it is really personal
> opinion. The state would be rather I don't have strong opinion to
> remove.

Neil, any opinion?

If we can document circumstances under which nfs exports of fat
filesystems are reliable, fine.

Otherwise I'd rather just be clear that we don't support it.

--b.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/