Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] fat: allocate persistent inode numbers

[OGAWA Hirofumi]

"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>> > Current -mm means the best-effort work only if inode cache is not
>> > evicted.  I.e. if there is no inode cache anymore on server, server
>> > would return ESTALE. So I guess the behavior would not be stable
>> > relatively.
>> Hi OGAWA.
>> Sorry for late response.
>> Okay, I will resend patchset include your suggeston.(-o nfs=2)
>> Do you mind adding busy list patch to avoid unlink issue ?
>> And in case of rename, FAT retrun EBUSY while opening file.
>> We can limit only rename.
>
> The server doesn't necessarily know whether a client has the file open,
> so does that really help?

If you are assuming to do rename() somehow, it would not be true. And if
so, you might want to rethink about the patch. (btw, I'm not thinking
deeply yet though, I guess we have to limit unlink() too)

Well, anyway, I'd like to see stable/clean read-only support at first.
(with new nfs option, and with MS_RDONLY).  After that, we can
enable write support.
-- 
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/