Subject: Re: problem with tmpfs and linux emulation?
To: Steven M. Bellovin <email@example.com>
From: Andrew Reilly <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/15/2005 10:36:22
On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 07:49:38PM -0500, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
> It seems likely that nothing will make this work short of a real byte
> offset in d_off. This in turn suggests that either the linux emulation
> layer has to have a way of knowing if it needs to do a conversion, or
> the file system layer needs to do the conversion, possibly as a result
> of a mount-time flag. I'd really rather avoid the latter if possible
> -- how expensive would it be for tmpfs to maintain a real byte count?
> (Seeking to that point need not be cheap; it's an infrequent operation,
> I suspect.)
Is it not possible to have the emulated lseek understand the
opaque cookies (perhaps with a hash lookup) and do the right
What is the good of passing an opaque cookie out to user-land if
it's not subsequently useful for something?