On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 10:58 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 10:54:12AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > > Okay, good to know, but I was hoping that there we could come up with > > an explicit list of filesystems that maintain their own private inode > > numbers outside of inode-i_ino. > > Anything using iget5_locked is a good start. Add to that file systems > implementing their own inode cache (at least xfs and bcachefs). Also good to know, thanks. However, at this point the lack of a clear answer is making me wonder a bit more about inode numbers in the view of VFS developers; do you folks care about inode numbers? I'm not asking to start an argument, it's a genuine question so I can get a better understanding about the durability and sustainability of inode->i_no. If all of you (the VFS folks) aren't concerned about inode numbers, I suspect we are going to have similar issues in the future and we (the LSM folks) likely need to move away from reporting inode numbers as they aren't reliably maintained by the VFS layer. -- paul-moore.com
