On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 12:18:15PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > > Are you claiming on-disk inode numbers are not guaranteed unique per > filesystem? It sounds like utter breakage, with capital 'f'. The reality is that there exists file systems which do not return unique inode numbers. For example, there are virtiofs implementations which pass the inode numbers straight through with a fixed dev_t. If you have a large number of packages mounted via iscsi, and those packages include shared libraries, then you can have two different shared libraries with the same inode number, and then you can watch the dynamic liunker get Very Confused, and debugging the problem can be.... interesting. (Three gueses how I found out about this, and the first two don't count. Yes, we figured out a workaround.) So that breakage exists already, today. For people who don't like this, they can stick to those file systems that still guarantee unique inode numbers, at least for local disk file systems --- for example, to use ext4 and xfs, over btrfs and bcachefs. However, this is a short-term expedient, and in the long term, we will need to guide userspace to use something that is more likely to work, such as file handles. And ideally, this needs to be standardized at venues such as the Austin Group, so that it becomes interfaces which are used across operating systems, not just for Linux. It's going to be a multi-year, if not decade-long, effort... - Ted
