On 08/21/2012 02:42 PM, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> On 08/20/2012 11:32 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: >>> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 11:06:06PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: >>>> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:32:25PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 08:33:38PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 07:49:23PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: >>>>>>> Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To provide fsnotify object inodes being watched without >>>>>>>> binding to alphabetical path we need to encode them with >>>>>>>> exportfs help. This patch adds a helper which operates >>>>>>>> with plain inodes directly. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> doesn't name_to_handle_at() work for you ? It also allows to get a file >>>>>>> handle using file descriptor. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, sorry for dealy. Well, the last idea is to get rid of this helper, >>>>>> I've sent out an updated version where ino+dev is only printed. >>>>> >>>>> I don't understand how ino and dev are useful to you, though, if you're >>>>> still hoping to be able to look up inodes using this information later >>>>> on. >>>> >>>> Hi Bruce, I believe having ino+dev is better than nothing. Otherwise we >>>> simply have no clue which targets are bound to inotify mark. Sometime >>>> (!) we can try to generate fhandle in userspace from this ino+dev bundle >>>> and then open the target file. >>> >>> That's insufficient to generate a filehandle in general. >> >> Yes, sure, but for live migration having inode and device is enough and that's why. >> We can use two ways of having a filesystem on the target machine in the same >> state (from paths points of view) as it was on destination one: >> >> 1. copy file tree in a rsync manner >> 2. copy a virtual disk image file >> >> In the 1st case we can map inode number to path easily, since we iterate over a filesystem >> anyway. I agree, that rsync is not perfect for migration but still. >> >> In the 2nd case we can generate filehandle out of an inode number only since we _do_ know >> that inode will not get reused. > > If you are going to to use open_by_handle, then that handle is not > sufficient right ? Or do you have open_by_inode ? as part of c/r ? Why? For e.g. ext4 you can construct a handle in userspace and open by it. >> >> However, if you have some better ideas on what information about inode should be exported >> to the userspace please share. >> > > Why not use name_to_handle(fd,...) and open_by_handle(handle,..) ? Because we don't have an fd at hands by the time we need to know the handle. > >>> (Also: there's the usual inode-number aliasing problem: the inode number >>> could get reused by another file. Unless you know the file is being >>> held open the whole time.) >>> > > -aneesh > > . > Thanks, Pavel -- 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
