Re: [PATCH 00/29] fs: require filesystems to explicitly opt-in to nfsd export support
Amir Goldstein <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.gfs2,dev.linux.lists.ntfs3,dev.linux.lists.ocfs2-devel,net.sourceforge.lists.linux-f2fs-devel,org.infradead.lists.linux-mtd,org.kernel.vger.ceph-devel,org.kernel.vger.linux-btrfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-cifs,org.kernel.vger.linux-ext4,org.kernel.vger.linux-fsdevel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-nfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-nilfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-unionfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-xfs,org.kvack.linux-mm,org.ozlabs.lists.linux-erofs |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAOQ4uxhnSPoqwws7XW4JU=jjgZJoFgCjcWwbfPaprDCZq=wnKQ@mail.gmail.com> |
On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 8:14 PM Amir Goldstein <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 7:32 PM Chuck Lever <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 15, 2026, at 1:17 PM, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 6:48 PM Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > >> In recent years, a number of filesystems that can't present stable > > >> filehandles have grown struct export_operations. They've mostly done > > >> this for local use-cases (enabling open_by_handle_at() and the like). > > >> Unfortunately, having export_operations is generally sufficient to make > > >> a filesystem be considered exportable via nfsd, but that requires that > > >> the server present stable filehandles. > > > > > > Where does the term "stable file handles" come from? and what does it mean? > > > Why not "persistent handles", which is described in NFS and SMB specs? > > > > > > Not to mention that EXPORT_OP_PERSISTENT_HANDLES was Acked > > > by both Christoph and Christian: > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20260115-rundgang-leihgabe-12018e93c00c@brauner/ > > > > > > Am I missing anything? > > > > PERSISTENT generally implies that the file handle is saved on > > persistent storage. This is not true of tmpfs. > > That's one way of interpreting "persistent". > Another way is "continuing to exist or occur over a prolonged period." > which works well for tmpfs that is mounted for a long time. > > But I am confused, because I went looking for where Jeff said that > you suggested stable file handles and this is what I found that you wrote: > > "tmpfs filehandles align quite well with the traditional definition > of persistent filehandles. tmpfs filehandles live as long as tmpfs files do, > and that is all that is required to be considered "persistent". > > > > > The use of "stable" means that the file handle is stable for > > the life of the file. This /is/ true of tmpfs. > > I can live with STABLE_HANDLES I don't mind as much, > I understand what it means, but the definition above is invented, > whereas the term persistent handles is well known and well defined. > And also forgot to mention - STABLE HANDLES is very lexicographically close to STALE HANDLES :-/ Thanks, Amir.