On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 10:18:00AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote: > > fat seems to be an exception as far as the 'real' file systems go. > > And it did sound to me like some of the synthetic ones had similar > > issues. > > > > Not sure what we can do about FAT without changing the filehandle > format in some fashion. The export ops just use > generic_encode_ino32_fh, and FAT doesn't have stable inode numbers. > The "nostale" ops seem sane enough but it looks like they only work > with the fs in r/o mode.
Yeah. I guess we need to ignore this because of <history> > > I think Amirs patch would take care of that. Although userland nfs > > servers or other storage applications using the handle syscalls would > > still see them. Then again fixing the problem that some handles > > did not fulfill the long standing (but not documented well enough) > > semantics probably is a good fix on it's own. > > Agreed. We should try to ensure uniqueness and persistence in all > filehandles both for nfsd and userland applications. Sounds good to me.
