From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263416AbTDGNHz (for ); Mon, 7 Apr 2003 09:07:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263407AbTDGNHz (for ); Mon, 7 Apr 2003 09:07:55 -0400 Received: from smtpzilla2.xs4all.nl ([194.109.127.138]:35081 "EHLO smtpzilla2.xs4all.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263416AbTDGNHy (for ); Mon, 7 Apr 2003 09:07:54 -0400 Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 15:19:19 +0200 (CEST) From: Roman Zippel X-X-Sender: roman@serv To: Andreas Schwab cc: Olivier Galibert , Subject: Re: [PATCH] new syscall: flink In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20030407081800.GA48052@dspnet.fr.eu.org> <20030407043555.G13397@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20030407091120.GA50075@dspnet.fr.eu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Mon, 7 Apr 2003, Andreas Schwab wrote: > |> I wouldn't rely on this functionality, not all filesystems might like it > |> to have to recreate a deleted fs entry. Most filesystems should be able to > |> do this, but all fs drivers have to be checked, that they do the right > |> thing. > > All filesystems already have to cope with unlinking of an open file > anyway, so relinking should not be a problem. I know, but creating a new dir entry and linking to an existing dir entry is not always the same, e.g. filesystems, where a dir entry is not simply a pointer to an inode table, have to update other entries as well to create a new link. So far filesystems could assume that source dentry was a valid dir entry, this patch changes this. bye, Roman