On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 08:55:04AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > Because of the "seen" flag, we have a 63 bit counter to play with. Could > we use a similar scheme to the one we use to handle when "jiffies" > wraps? Assume that we'd never compare two values that were more than > 2^62 apart? We could add i_version_before/i_version_after macros to make > it simple to handle this. As far as I recall the protocol just assumes it can never wrap. I guess you could add a new change_attr_type that works the way you describe. But without some new protocol clients aren't going to know what to do with a change attribute that wraps. I think this just needs to be designed so that wrapping is impossible in any realistic scenario. I feel like that's doable? If we feel we have to catch that case, the only 100% correct behavior would probably be to make the filesystem readonly. --b.
