From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: Curiosities of Linux NFSD file handles Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 14:35:11 -0500 Message-ID: <20081204193511.GE7575@fieldses.org> References: <19603.1228409217@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Neil Brown , Christoph Hellwig , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org To: David Howells Return-path: Received: from mail.fieldses.org ([66.93.2.214]:48834 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752327AbYLDTfQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Dec 2008 14:35:16 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <19603.1228409217@redhat.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 04:46:57PM +0000, David Howells wrote: > > I've been poking around in the exportfs code, and I see that the handle decode > routines seem to expect that they may be given more data for a handle than the > encode_fh() routine produced. Somebody else who understands what you're asking about off the top of their heads may be able to pop up and answer this. But I'm a little confused. Which encode/decode routines exactly, and where do you see them making assumptions about the size of the data? --b. > Is this still true? Or can I assume that the amount of data now given to the > decoder will exactly reflect the amount of data obtained from the encoder?