On Thu 08-01-15 15:20:21, Andreas Dilger wrote: > On Jan 8, 2015, at 1:26 AM, Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue 09-12-14 13:22:25, Li Xi wrote: > >> This patch adds a new internal field of ext4 inode to save project > >> identifier. Also a new flag EXT4_INODE_PROJINHERIT is added for > >> inheriting project ID from parent directory. > > I have noticed one thing you apparently changed in v7 of the patch set. > > See below. > > > >> diff --git a/fs/ext4/ext4.h b/fs/ext4/ext4.h > >> index 29c43e7..8bd1da9 100644 > >> --- a/fs/ext4/ext4.h > >> +++ b/fs/ext4/ext4.h > >> @@ -377,16 +377,18 @@ struct flex_groups { > >> #define EXT4_EA_INODE_FL 0x00200000 /* Inode used for large EA */ > >> #define EXT4_EOFBLOCKS_FL 0x00400000 /* Blocks allocated beyond EOF */ > >> #define EXT4_INLINE_DATA_FL 0x10000000 /* Inode has inline data. */ > >> +#define EXT4_PROJINHERIT_FL FS_PROJINHERIT_FL /* Create with parents projid */ > > How did FS_PROJINHERIT_FL get here? There used to be 0x20000000 in older > > version of the patch set which is correct - this definition is defining > > ext4 on-disk format. As such it is an ext4 specific flag and should be > > definined to a fixed constant independed of any other filesystem. It seems > > you are somewhat mixing what is an on-disk format flag value and what is a > > flag value passed from userspace. These two may be different things and > > you need to convert between the values when getting / setting flags... > > Currently the EXT4_*_FL and FS_*_FL values are all identical, and there > is no reason to change that before it is actually needed. Since the > FS_PROJINHERIT_FL is used via chattr/lsattr from userspace, this value > must also be kept the same in the future to avoid API breakage, so there > is no reason to worry about incompatibilities. Agreed. I was somewhat worried about having on-disk flag defined through the external non-ext4 define but you are right that neither can really change once we ship a kernel with it. > See also the [v8 5/5] patch, which is changing the EXT4_*_FL values to > use FS_*_FL constants, where applicable, so that it is more clear that > these values need to be the same. OK, I've missed that. So if things will be consistent again, I'm fine with the change. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html