On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 15:14 +0100, Jörn Engel wrote: > If you are talking about inode_init_once() here, I like the idea. > i_generation must be initialized somehow, even a 4-byte information > leak could be a problem. But the initialization should happen in the > rare event of allocating a slab page, not when reusing a deleted > inode. > > Jeff, why do you increment i_generation in new_inode instead of here? I suppose we could do that...that might be better for stuff that calls alloc_inode directly. -- Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
