On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 11:43:56AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> I had thought of indexed inode flags as an alternative to the xattr/string
> parsing thing. Feature flags make their first appearance as part of a per-FS
> flag-space and are migrated to the common flag-space when there is demand.
> It would also avoid the need for each fs to create its own flag ioctl.
>
> On the other hand, someone suggested I try remaking IOC_[GS]ETFLAG as an xattr,
> so off I went. :)
>
> #define FS_IOC_FLAGS_COMMON 0
> #define FS_IOC_FLAGS_COMMON2 1
> #define FS_IOC_FLAGS_EXT4 0xEF53
>
> struct inode_flag_ioctl {
> u32 flag;
> u32 value; /* or u64? */
> };
> #define FS_IOC_GETFLAGS2 _IOR('f', 12, struct inode_flag_ioctl);
> #define FS_IOC_SETFLAGS2 _IOW('f', 13, struct inode_flag_ioctl);
Is having this structure and demultiplexing based on
inode_flag_ioctl.flag really worth it?
I'd just simply introduce two new ioctl's for generic flags:
FS_IOC_COMMON_[GS]ETFLAGS, and then two new ioctl's for each file
system: FS_IOC_EXT4_[GS]ETFLAGS, FS_IOC_BTRFS_[GS]ETFLAGS, etc.
Is this uglier or pretier than using strings? Eh.... six of one, half
dozen of the other. I think it's mostly a matter of personal taste.
- Ted
--
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
