On Tue, Dec 19 2017, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Fri 08-12-17 13:17:31, NeilBrown wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 07 2017, Amir Goldstein wrote:
>>
>> > On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 5:20 AM, NeilBrown wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Dec 06 2017, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:56 PM, NeilBrown wrot
On Fri 08-12-17 13:17:31, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 07 2017, Amir Goldstein wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 5:20 AM, NeilBrown wrote:
> >> On Wed, Dec 06 2017, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:56 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
>
> -/* limit the handle size to
On Thu, Dec 07 2017, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 5:20 AM, NeilBrown wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 06 2017, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:56 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
-/* limit the handle size to NFSv4 handle size now */
-#define MAX_HANDLE_SZ 128
>>
On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 02:20:05PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> We can allocate in fs/notify/fdinfo.c:show_fdinfo() which is
> the earliest 'notify' specific code to run. There is no
> opportunity to return an error but GFP_KERNEL allocations under 1 page
> never fail..
"never"
* The default alloc
On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 5:20 AM, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 06 2017, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:56 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
>>>
>>> -/* limit the handle size to NFSv4 handle size now */
>>> -#define MAX_HANDLE_SZ 128
>>> +/* Must be larger than NFSv4 file handle, but sma
On Wed, Dec 06 2017, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:56 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
>>
>> -/* limit the handle size to NFSv4 handle size now */
>> -#define MAX_HANDLE_SZ 128
>> +/* Must be larger than NFSv4 file handle, but small
>> + * enough for an on-stack allocation. overlayfs doe
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:56 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
>
> -/* limit the handle size to NFSv4 handle size now */
> -#define MAX_HANDLE_SZ 128
> +/* Must be larger than NFSv4 file handle, but small
> + * enough for an on-stack allocation. overlayfs doesn't
> + * want this too close to 255.
> + */
> +#d
On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 07:56:38AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
>
> Amazon EFS provides an NFSv4.1 filesystem which appears to use
> (close to) full length (128 byte) file handles.
I wonder why?
Anyway, it seems unfortunate that systemd should need to worry about
filehandle sizes at all, given that
Amazon EFS provides an NFSv4.1 filesystem which appears to use
(close to) full length (128 byte) file handles.
This causes the handle reported by name_to_handle_at() to exceed
MAX_HANDLE_SZ, resulting in
EOVERFLOW if 128 bytes were requested, or
EINVAL if the size reported by the previous call
9 matches
Mail list logo