Bastien ROUCARIES <[email protected]> writes: >> (I assume this issue == orphaned inode issue). >> >> ext* doesn't have this issue. If ext* made orphaned inode, ext* doesn't >> delete inode from inode table until calling iput() from last referencer. >> >> In FAT case, FAT inode is embedded into dir entry. So, if unlinked inode >> (then orphaned inode is detached (fat_detach())), FAT deletes inode (dir >> entry) from dir. > > Could be possible to not delete it?
It should be deletable on linux. Because many apps are assuming orphaned inode works. > I mean using a special value for this case, mark delete (using 0xe5 as > first character) but put for instance creation month to be egal to 15. > > This entry will be therefore be keep and not overwritten by successive > file creation. > > At least this solve the file deleted issue (not the rename issue unfortunatly) I assume you are saying to prevent creation somehow, not deletion. Yes, it is possible though, it would give additional overhead and complexity to us. Thanks. -- OGAWA Hirofumi <[email protected]> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
