From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: =?utf-8?q?J=C3=B6rn_Engel?= <joern@logfs.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/7] cramfs: create unique inode numbers
Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2008 23:24:51 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hch@lst.de
References: <20080531152013.031903990@arndb.de> <20080531153510.692084580@arndb.de> <20080601165048.GC13094@logfs.org>
In-Reply-To: <20080601165048.GC13094@logfs.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200806012324.51734.arnd@arndb.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1222
Lines: 29

On Sunday 01 June 2008, Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Sat, 31 May 2008 17:20:15 +0200, arnd@arndb.de wrote:
> > 
> > This changes the inode number in cramfs to be based on
> > the location of the dentry instead of the file, in order
> > to make inodes unique.
> 
> Couldn't this cause problems for NFS?  The same inode no longer has a
> stable inode number across reboots.  Basing on dentry location can also
> be an information leak and cause problems on 64bit machines with old
> userspace.

Sorry if I was not clear with this: I meant dentry location on disk,
not in memory. So the inode number is still stable across reboots and
does not leak data, it is just different from before.

> We could keep the original approach and use a static counter otherwise.
> Something roughly like this:

One thing I like about my 2/7 patch is that it actually reduces the amount
of code in the file system, while your solution would increase it, with
otherwise identical behaviour.

	Arnd <><
--
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/