On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 11:24:58AM +0100, David Disseldorp wrote: > Hi Darrick, > > On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 17:58:17 -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > > (removexattr looks like a pain in perl though...) > > > > > > Anyway it's late now, I'll look at the diff tomorrow. > > > > ...or thursday now, since I decided to reply to the online fsck design > > doc review comments, which took most of the workday. I managed to bang > > out a python script (perl doesn't support setxattr!) that cut the xattr > > overhead down to nearly zero. > > IIUC we currently only depend on python for the fio perf tests and > btrfs/154 . My preference would be to not see it spread further I don't appreciate your dismissal of the patch before I've even posted it! The fstests README clearly lists python3 as a dependency. Argument parsing and xattr calls are provided by the base python3 runtime. No third party libraries are required for this new program, and if they were, they'd be added to the README. > (especially if it's just to shave off a little runtime), mostly because > it's a pain for dependency tracking. > Perhaps you could use perl's syscall(SYS_fsetxattr(), ...)? Well, that or Raw system calls are a terrible idea for maintainability. You'd *seriously* rather I open-code the glibc xattr wrappers and make the fstests community maintain that for the sake of your preference? > rewrite it again in awk ;-P WTAF? --D > Cheers, David
