On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 08:38:48AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:04:56AM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > An odd exception: in the presence of "posix" acls, "ls -l" requests an > > acl for every entry, so it can decide whether or not to add a "+" after > > the mode (which indicates the presence of a non-trivial acl.) Judging > > from http://www.bestbits.at/richacl/example.html, the same is intended > > (but not yet implemented) for richacls. > > > > Maybe if that case were common, there'd be some advantage to ls being > > able to do a readdir plus to the nfs client that the nfs client could > > translate into a single readdir to the server? > > > > But I hope it doesn't come to that. > > Having a xstat flag that a filesystem can set meaning there is no > additional security information would be way more efficient for the > common case. I think that might make sense. (Though I can't claim any evidence of an actual problem here. Just that if people are counting the stat's on "ls -l" then may find out they run into those extra getxattrs too.) --b. -- 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
