This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Extended file stat: Splitting file- and fs-specific info?

On 05/09/2012 01:19 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 10:21:14AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
Dave Chinner<> wrote:

I don't think we want to expose the inode generation numbers. It is
trivial to construct NFS file handles (usually just fsid, inode
number and generation) with that information and hence bypass
security checks to access files.

I was asked for it by Bernd Schubert for userspace NFS servers and FUSE - maybe he can say what he wants it for.

It's entirely broken, as a generation number might be part of the file handle (and for Linux-like filesystems normally is), but it's entirely up to the filesystem to decide how it works. That's why we added system calls to do operations on opaque file handles that the file system controls. Exposing a completely meaningless "generation" is a bad idea.

The basic idea of generation numbers is to check if an inode was recycled, so only if the tuple of inode-number and generation-number matches we still have the same file. Kernel nfs uses that and unfs3 uses it via EXT2_IOC_GETVERSION, which has the overhead of an additional syscall. Unionfs-fuse usually keeps file open, however, it might run out of the maximum allowed files and I plan to add a mode to close and re-open files as failback mode. For that the definite knowledge if a file/inode is still the very same and the inode was not just recycled is crucial.

All of that being said, I think with open_by_handle_at() syscall we don't need the inode generation number any more.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]