So I have converted all the xattr internals over to an inode from a dentry but there is one issue with that. To set EAs on CIFS they need a full path for the file. I don't think we can reconcile using inodes in the vfs operation with CIFS needing a path. If you have a suggestion on how to handle this I'm more than willing to listen. Everything else however seems to be a trivial change. Dave On Fri, 2008-03-07 at 11:03 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 12:13:58PM -0500, Dave Quigley wrote: > > So are we keeping the dentry parameter for these calls, or am I changing > > them over to an inode. If it is going to use an inode this means I need > > to change the parameters for the xattr code. Is there a reason why the > > xattr code takes dentries instead of an inode? > > Ah, that's the reason why you use dentries. Either keep the dentry > in the call that does the xattr modification for now and document that > why you're doing it, or if you feel eager fix up the xattr interface. > > In fact the new fine-grained xattr interface already only passed inodes > which is what the inode operations should have been doing aswell - > xattrs are a concept tied to the inode and not in any way to a > hiearchical pathname component. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
