Charles P Wright: > Unionfs only gets hardlinks that were created on Unionfs right.
If you use the persistent inode number feature, you can handle hardlinks created by branch fs, can't you? > > What will happen after the cached dentry and inode are freed, by > > shrink_dcache() or something? Is your i_stacked_inode freed too? Is it > > still available? > The lower-level inode can not be thrown out if there is a reference from a > stacked inode, because the stacked inode takes a reference count on the > lower-level inode. Yes it is. But how about the 1-1 mapping ballance? For example, if a user does 'find / -ls' or something, - ecryptfs/wrapfs/unionfs inode cache may be discarded - lower_inode may be survived, remains in cache (since unionfs branch is accessible by 'find') - lower_inode->i_stacked_inode will point illegal address - next time when ecryptfs/wrapfs/unionfs access the inode, something bad will happen The posted code might be just a prototype to show the concept, so the handlling the referrence counter of i_stacked_inode might be just lacked. But I am afraid if ecryptfs is going to handle iput/iget to i_stacked_inode, it may create a 'never-freed-inode' since they refers each other. Junjiro Okajima _______________________________________________ unionfs mailing list unionfs@mail.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/mailman/listinfo/unionfs
