On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 08:45:40PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > After that the wire up should be so trivial that you can wire up btrfs, >> > xfs and f2fs as well, which is important to make the feature mergeable. >> >> Why would the patch queue become more mergeable by having support for >> more filesystems in it? The filesystem specific code really isn't all >> that interesting. > > The hardest part for the filesystem support is the on-disk feature > flag that needs to be set. The kernel part of that is easy, but it's > an on-disk format change and so there's also all the userspace side > for mkfs, fsck, debug tools, etc, that also need to be able to parse > and understand it. So while the xattr code can be made much more > generic, there's a bunch of filesystem specific code that needs to > go into multiple different repositories and userspace packages for > this. Yes. > Andreas, I also can't remember if any xfstests have been written for > these ACLs? That would certainly help make sure all these > filesystems have equivalent behaviour... There's a reasonable amount of tests in the richacl user-space package which are shell based, with a few small C helpers. We could move those into xfstests eventually; now seems a bit early to me. Thanks, Andreas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
