From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Kara Subject: Re: [RFC 3/3] uniqueness of inode number, configfs, debugfs, procfs, ramfs and tmpfs Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 13:53:14 +0200 Message-ID: <20140522115314.GC7999@quack.suse.cz> References: <1400698140-25853-1-git-send-email-hooanon05g@gmail.com> <1400698140-25853-4-git-send-email-hooanon05g@gmail.com> <30078.1400720591@jrobl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, adilger@dilger.ca, hch@lst.de, dchinner@redhat.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, jlbec@evilplan.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, hughd@google.com To: "J. R. Okajima" Return-path: Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:37307 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754809AbaEVLxS (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 May 2014 07:53:18 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <30078.1400720591@jrobl> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu 22-05-14 10:03:11, J. R. Okajima wrote: > > hooanon05g@gmail.com: > > Turn the feature ON which was introduced by previous commit. > > It was for ramfs and tmpfs only. Hum, have you observed any real problems with non-unique inode numbers even for tmpfs? Because e.g. the NFS case you mentioned isn't IMHO right - tmpfs sets i_generation to current time so even if inode counter wraps, i_generation will be different and so they will be different inodes for NFS. And the backup case isn't very convincing either - who would be backing up tmpfs filesystem ;)? Honza > configfs, debugfs and procfs don't need this. > > > J. R. Okajima > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR