Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 10 Oct 2002 15:19:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 10 Oct 2002 15:17:58 -0400 Received: from packet.digeo.com ([12.110.80.53]:27062 "EHLO packet.digeo.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 10 Oct 2002 15:16:50 -0400 Message-ID: <3DA5D374.330E5970@digeo.com> Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 12:22:28 -0700 From: Andrew Morton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.19-pre4 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexander Viro CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [LART] inode mismanagement in hugetlb code References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Oct 2002 19:22:28.0807 (UTC) FILETIME=[5F695570:01C27092] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 922 Lines: 22 Alexander Viro wrote: > > [A discussion of the meanings of the terms "MUST", "SHOULD", and "MAY" appears > in RFC-1123; the terms "MUST NOT" and "SHOULD NOT" are logical extensions of > this usage] > > a) inodes MUST have an address of valid struct super_block in their > ->i_sb. Had been discussed quite a few times already. > afaict, that code only wants an inode because it is borrowing the pagecache functions for page lookup. It's using i_ino as a search key too. It has no superblock. Solutions might be: 1) allocate a private structure or 2) require that these inodes come from hugetlbfs, although the "key" makes that a bit tricky. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/