Re: incorrect inode count on reiserfs

[Nikita Danilov <Nikita@Namesys.COM>]

Erik Hensema writes:
 > Nikita Danilov (Nikita@Namesys.COM) wrote:
 > > Petr Sebor writes:
 > > > I have noticed this behavior when moving the inn2 news server to 
 > > > 2.6.0-test11 kernel
 > > > from 2.4.23
 > > > (inn2 refuses to start because if free inode shortage)
 > 
 > [...]
 > 
 > > reiserfs has no fixed predefined number of inodes on the file
 > > system. Hence, field f_files of struct statfs (see man 2 statfs) is not
 > > applicable to this file system. Man page explicitly says:
 > > 
 > >        Fields that are undefined for a particular file system are
 > >        set  to  0.
 > > 
 > > Previous man page stated that file system should put -1 (4294967295)
 > > into undefined fields. Reiserfs has been changed to conform to the
 > > changed specification.
 > 
 > [...]
 > 
 > > Fix would really be simple: ignore test results if ->f_files is 0 or
 > > 0xffffffff.
 > 
 > But innwatch checks for a out-of-inodes condition. How can it differentiate
 > between a undefined number of inodes (field set to 0) and a system that ran
 > out of inodes (field dropped to 0)?
 > 
 > A '4294967295 inodes should be enough for anyone'-situation is preferable I
 > think.

This is messy, because we have both statfs and statfs64 and this would
lead to the overflow detection problems.

I don't know what is the best solution here. statfs(2) is just not very
good interface. It was obviously designed to serve ffs/ufs/ext2 type
file systems only.

Looking at the magic in f_type field, is ugly, but should work.

 > 
 > -- 
 > Erik Hensema <erik@hensema.net>

Nikita.