On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > a) i_writecount is about VM_DENYWRITE, basically. Reusing it for ima could > get unpleasant; when it's positive, we are fine, but it can get negative as > well. IMA will have interesting time dealing with that. > > b) i_count is simply a refcount for struct inode. Not exactly the number > of dentries, but that's the main contributor. Basically, that's "how many > pointers outside of inode hash chains point that that struct inode at the > moment". My question was deeper. More along the lines of "why would IMA care?" How/why could IMA ever care about the pointless and trivial differences between its current private open/read/write counts and the counts that we already maintain? Yes, yes, I realize that they have technical differences in what they count. That's not the question. The question is "Why would IMA care?" Linus -- 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