>> No, just make it do
>>
>> {l,f,}chflags({name,fd,name}, u32 *old, u32 *new);
>>
>> and then you can read and write the flags with just one system
>> call. I do not want to extend on stat() yet again.
With *old and *new being what? Raw fs-specific inode data?
Something with a version number or size?
> OK. But there is one but - we definitely have flags on ext2, ufs and
> <urgh> FAT ("System" == Immutable). I'm more than sure that other
FAT has attributes like "MICROS~1.HTM". NTFS has a 4th time stamp.
HFS has type and creator data.
> filesystems will join too - we are risking to run out of bits if we will
> go for plain union and we will get the whole lot of nasty bit-shuffling in
> bargain. I still think that distinction between generic and fs-specific
> deserves to be done in API. I.e. we are either passing raw attributes and
> then the result is fs-specific (and it's fs responsibility to recalculate
> generic attributes) or we are interested in generic attributes and then we
> don't want to mess with fs differences. <generic> + <ext2-specific> +
> <ufs-specific> + ... in one bitmap will lead to major PITA. <generic vs.
> raw> + {<generic attributes> | <attributes of whatever fs it sits on>}
> will give us decent bandwidth and make extensions *much* easier.
> Hmm... Methink I know what should be done here:
> chflags(name, level, old, new) where level being either FL_VFS or
> FL_EXT2 or FL_UFS, etc. IOW, the scheme similar to setsockopt().
Um, might there be a VFS already? As in "mount -t vfs..."?
There are already at least 3 XFS filesystems. FL_GENERIC is
less likely to be a filesystem name.
Oh, be sure to use a 64-bit inode if you return that data.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/