On Thu 05-01-12 01:40:09, Djalal Harouni wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 12:32:54AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > With the metadata checksum feature we were discussing using the inode
> > > generation as part of the seed for the directory leaf block checksum, so
> > > that it wasn't possible to incorrectly access stale directory blocks from
> > > a previous incarnation of the same inode number.
> > >
> > > We were discussing just disabling this ioctl on filesystems with metadata
> > > checksums, and printing a deprecation warning for filesystems without that
> > > feature enabled. I'm not aware of any real-world use for this ioctl, since
> > > NFS cannot use it to reconstruct handles because there's no API to allocate
> > > an inode with a specific number, so setting the generation is pointless.
> > OK, I didn't know this. I'm fine with deprecating the ioctl if it's
> > useless but since that's going to take a while I think the cleanup still
> > makes some sense.
> Actually I've grepped this ioctl but did not found use cases, but as
> ext{3,2} also support it, I did not say anything (this is old, there is
> even the EXT4_IOC_SETVERSION_OLD ioctl ?). I don't know if this ioctl is
> used or not.
>
> Only the reiserfs and ext{2,3,4} filesystems support this ioctl. The reiserfs
> do not use mutexes at all, even in the REISERFS_IOC_SETFLAGS ioctl which will
> test and set _all_ the possible values of the i_flags field.
> Perhaps I should also send a patch for this ?
Yes, possibly reiserfs should use i_mutex for that ioctl.
> And perhaps ext2 should also be updated.
Sure. Send a patch my way when you have it.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
