Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Adding Uli to the Cc list to make sure this system call is useful
> for glibc / can be exported by it. Otherwise it's rather pointless
> to add it.
>
> > (6) BSD stat compatibility: Including more fields from the BSD stat such
> > as creation time (st_btime) and inode generation number (st_gen)
> > [Jeremy Allison, Bernd Schubert]
>
> How is this different from (1) and (4)?
A matter of intent, really, and who proposed it.
> > (7) Extra coherency data may be useful in making backups [Andreas Dilger].
>
> What do you mean with that?
There are extra dates and version numbers potentially available. This may be
useful in making backups. Ask Andreas.
> > (8) Allow the filesystem to indicate what it can/cannot provide: A
> > filesystem can now say it doesn't support a standard stat feature if
> > that isn't available.
>
> What for?
So that you can decide not to use it. Some of our filesystems fabricate things
that they don't actually store.
> > (9) Make the fields a consistent size on all arches, and make them large.
>
> Why making them large for the sake of it? We'll need massive changes
> all through libc and applications to ever make use of this. So please
> coordinate the types used with Uli.
Otherwise we end up with #ifdefs and duplicated fields of different sizes
within stat structs, and fields of "long" types which vary in size, depending
on the environment.
I just want to make sure that:
- st_ino is stored as 64-bit
- st_size and st_blocks are stored 64-bit
- st.{a,b,c,m}time.tv_sec are stored 64-bit
We could probably stand to make st_blksize 32-bit. I'd quite like to leave
st_gen as 64-bits and I definitely want to leave st_data_version as 64-bits.
> > The following structures are defined for the use of these new system calls:
> >
> > struct xstat_parameters {
> > unsigned long long request_mask;
> > };
>
> Just pass this as a single flag by value. And just make it an unsigned
> long to make the calling convention a lot simpler.
Already done.
> > struct xstat_dev {
> > unsigned int major, minor;
> > };
> >
> > struct xstat_time {
> > unsigned long long tv_sec, tv_nsec;
> > };
>
> No point in adding special types here that aren't genericly useful.
> Also this is the first and only system call using split major/minor
> values for the dev_t. All this just creates more churn than it helps.
I can perhaps agree on the device numbers, though some filesystems we have can
store numbers that can't be represented by dev_t. I think, however, everything
we have can be handled by a 32:32 split. The numbers could then be encoded as
desired in userspace.
The problem with using extant time structs is they use "long" or "unsigned
long". And I specifically want to get away from that, since it might be
32-bits or it might be 64-bits.
> >
> > struct xstat {
> > unsigned long long st_result_mask;
>
> Just st_mask?
Perhaps, but it contrasts nicely with request_mask, and makes it easier to
document.
> > unsigned long long st_data_version;
>
> st version?
Acceptable.
> > unsigned long long st_inode_flags;
>
>
>
> > The defined bits in request_mask and st_result_mask are:
> >
> > XSTAT_REQUEST_MODE Want/got st_mode
> > XSTAT_REQUEST_NLINK Want/got st_nlink
> > XSTAT_REQUEST_UID Want/got st_uid
> > XSTAT_REQUEST_GID Want/got st_gid
> > XSTAT_REQUEST_RDEV Want/got st_rdev
> > XSTAT_REQUEST_ATIME Want/got st_atime
> > XSTAT_REQUEST_MTIME Want/got st_mtime
> > XSTAT_REQUEST_CTIME Want/got st_ctime
> > XSTAT_REQUEST_INO Want/got st_ino
> > XSTAT_REQUEST_SIZE Want/got st_size
> > XSTAT_REQUEST_BLOCKS Want/got st_blocks
> > XSTAT_REQUEST__BASIC_STATS The stuff in the normal stat struct
> > XSTAT_REQUEST_BTIME Want/got st_btime
> > XSTAT_REQUEST_GEN Want/got st_gen
> > XSTAT_REQUEST_DATA_VERSION Want/got st_data_version
> > XSTAT_REQUEST_INODE_FLAGS Want/got st_inode_flags
> > XSTAT_REQUEST__EXTENDED_STATS The stuff in the xstat struct
> > XSTAT_REQUEST__ALL_STATS The defined set of requestables
>
> What's the point of the REQUEST in the name?
Well, they are.
> Also no double underscores inside the identifier. Instead adding a _MASK
> postfix for masks would make it a lot more clear.
Perhaps.
> > The defined bits in st_inode_flags are the usual FS_xxx_FL flags in the
> > LSW, plus some extra flags in the MSW:
> >
> > FS_SPECIAL_FL Special kernel file, such as found in procfs
> > FS_AUTOMOUNT_FL Specific automount point
> > FS_AUTOMOUNT_ANY_FL Free-form automount directory
> > FS_REMOTE_FL File is remote
> > FS_ENCRYPTED_FL File is encrypted
> > FS_SYSTEM_FL File is marked system (DOS/NTFS/CIFS)
> > FS_TEMPORARY_FL File is temporary (NTFS/CIFS)
> > FS_OFFLINE_FL File is offline (CIFS)
>
> Please don't overload the FL_ namespace even more. It's already a
> complete mess given that it overloads the extN on-disk namespace.
> You're much better off just adding a clean new namespace.
Yeah. I've been thinking that's probably the better thing to do.
> > The system calls are:
> >
> > ssize_t ret = xstat(int dfd,
> > const char *filename,
> > unsigned flags,
> > const struct xstat_parameters *params,
> > struct xstat *buffer,
> > size_t buflen);
>
> If you already have a buflen parameter there is absolute no need for
> the extra results field. Just define new fields at the end and include
> them if the bufsize is big enough and it's in the mask of requested
> fields.
Or, as someone else has already said, return -E2BIG if the result won't fit.
> > The request_mask should be set by the caller to specify extra results that
> > the caller may desire. These come in a number of classes:
> >
> > (0) dev, blksize.
> >
> > These are local data and are always available.
> >
> > (1) mode, nlinks, uid, gid, [amc]time, ino, size, blocks.
> >
> > These will be returned whether the caller asks for them or not. The
> > corresponding bits in result_mask will be set to indicate their
> > presence.
> >
> > If the caller didn't ask for them, then they may be approximated. For
> > example, NFS won't waste any time updating them from the server,
> > unless as a byproduct of updating something requested.
>
> Please don't introduce tons of special cases. Instead use a simple rule
> like:
>
> - a filesystem must return all attributes requests, or return an
> error if it can't.
> - a filesystem may return additional attributes, the caller can detect
> this by looking at st_mask.
>
> plus possibly a list of attributes the filesystem must be able to
> provide if requests. I don't see a reason to make that mask different
> from the attributes required by Posix.
Firstly: Lightweight stat: I want to say that the filesystem may return data
that is out of date if it isn't asked for specifically, but the filesystem has
a copy available. But I'm not sure that this should apply to non-standard
fields.
Secondly: It doesn't matter what POSIX wants; not all filesystems we support
have everything available. Where something that's standard is not available,
we have the opportunity to indicate this, whilst still providing a fabricated
result, so that the user can take note of this fact if they choose to, whilst
totally ignoring the indication if they prefer, and just using the fabrication.
Davod
--
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
