Re: kern/41068: tmpfs assertion

[David Holland <dholland-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR kern/41068; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: David Holland <dholland-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc: 
Subject: Re: kern/41068: tmpfs assertion
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 15:23:27 +0000

 On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 10:10:05AM +0000, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
  >>>>  This cookie scheme is clearly not workable.
  >>>>  
  >>>>  Why doesn't it just assign sequence numbers to each node or something?
  >>>  
  >>> Because Linux compat would fall apart with that rather badly.
  >>  
  >>  Linux compat would fall over on small integers? What on earth are they
  >>  doing? 
  >  
  >  What small numbers do you have in mind? If you don't want to do all the
  >  dance with checking for duplicates, you have to use 64bit numbers.
  >  ...and those are a problem for 32bit readdir applications.
 
 Small integers starting at 3 and incrementing by 1?
 
 In the worst case you'd have to run some compaction code once each
 time 2 billion files were cycled through a directory.
 
 I don't see what the problem is.
 
 -- 
 David A. Holland
 dholland%netbsd.org@localhost