On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 06:19:49PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 01:52:43AM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > > > > That's right. More or less it just requires alloc_inode to be exported, > > adding more branches in new_inode would not be a good way to go. > > One test/branch shouldn't hurt much. If we go through filesystems anyway may as well just use alloc_inode. > > > I guess the main customer is sockets only. > > > > I guess. Sockets and ram based filesystems. Interestingly I don't know > > really what it's for (in socket code it's mostly for reporting and > > hashing it seems). It sure isn't guaranteed to be unique. > > Maybe it could be generated lazily on access for those? > I suppose stat on a socket is relatively rare. > The only problem is would need an accessor. > > But ok out of scope. Yea that might work. sock_i_ino() and ->dname covers a lot. > > Well I think glibc will convert 64 bit stat struct to 32bit for > > old apps. It detects if the ino can't fit in 32 bits. > > ... and will fail the stat. Which is what we're trying to avoid, I guess. -- 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
