Take for example nfs3_FhandleToCache(). It gets wire handle and calls
extract_handle() method. What is the job of extract_handle method?
Assuming that it is supposed to return "key" handle as the comments
there say. Then nfs3_FhandleToCache calls create_handle() with the
"key" handle. This is unex
>From Daniel Gryniewicz :
Daniel Gryniewicz has uploaded this change for review. (
https://review.gerrithub.io/356761
Change subject: VFS - Coverity fixes in readlink
..
VFS - Coverity fixes in readlink
- Don't close FD if it
>From :
supriti.si...@suse.com has uploaded this change for review. (
https://review.gerrithub.io/356733
Change subject: RPM:install rgw_bucket.conf
..
RPM:install rgw_bucket.conf
Change-Id: Ie43b8608df51b090a730e8bdd8a393dea
Based on the comments, I'd say you're correct. However, only PSEUDO and
GPFS modify the buffer in any way other than setting length in
extract_handle(), and those 2 only byte swap them. All the protocols
get a handle by running the pair extract_handle() create_handle(). In
the majority of FS
Hi,
We have been working with 2.3-stable release for a while now. We have
stabilised our FSAl layer recently and wanted to move to 2.4. I can
see that there are a lot of design changes as well which went into
2.4. How is the FSAL layer impacted with these changes? Are there any
semantic changes?
> We have been working with 2.3-stable release for a while now. We have
> stabilised our FSAl layer recently and wanted to move to 2.4. I can see
that
> there are a lot of design changes as well which went into 2.4. How is the
FSAL
> layer impacted with these changes? Are there any semantic changes
