The two sides of reflink()
The two sides of reflink()
Posted May 6, 2009 0:49 UTC (Wed) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330)In reply to: The two sides of reflink() by martinfick
Parent article: The two sides of reflink()
You'd need flags in the filesystem that would prevent the filesystem from being mounted by a kernel that lacks the needed feature.
Posted May 6, 2009 5:59 UTC (Wed)
by tialaramex (subscriber, #21167)
[Link]
It also contains per-inode flags, so that implementations can be warned that they're missing a feature needed to read or update a particular file, in this case the implementation should fail open() for that file.
Of course poor quality implementations from third parties may be missing some or all of these checks. Fortunately the worst implementation I'm aware of as of this moment is read-only, so any problems only occur when reading files with that implementation and if/when they reboot into Linux everything is fine again.
The two sides of reflink()