On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 23:30:42 +0000, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 11:30:40PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: > > On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 14:23 -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 09:47:06AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: > > > > Attribute flags can be useful in userspace when working with filesystems > > > > such as 9p. > > > > > > No, they aren't. They are kernel internal values and userspace has no > > > fucking business messing with them. > > > > > > > They became userspace business once they got exposed through 9p. > > > > Take a look at <linux/net/9p/9p.h>: > > > > /** > > * struct p9_iattr_dotl - P9 inode attribute for setattr > > * @valid: bitfield specifying which fields are valid > > * same as in struct iattr > > [...] > > > > That structure is userspace facing, and it's using iattr values. > > > > So either we expose them through fs.h, through 9p.h, or modify 9p code > > to not use them directly. But claiming that they're kernel internal > > values isn't entirely correct. > > They *are* kernel internal values and 9P is asking for trouble exposing > them. Translation: tomorrow we might reassign those as we bloody wish > and any userland code that happens to rely on their values will break. > At which point we'll handle complaints by pointing and laughing. > > It's a 9P bug; fix it there. Turning random internal constants into a part > of ABI is not going to work. I guess we would need to define them at the protocol level then. Something like f88657ce3f9713a0c62101dffb0e972a979e77b9. -aneesh -- 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
