Andreas Dilger <adilger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > __u32 st_win_attrs; > > It seems some of these flags are duplicated with the st_information field, > and some are duplicate with FS_IOC_GETFLAGS values, and returning the same > information in multiple ways is confusing. > > If these flags are part of the CIFS protocol, They're part of the Windows API. CIFS/SMB and NTFS have them at the same values. > and are directly usable by Samba then I can understand we wouldn't want to > change them once in the kernel and then convert them back in userspace, but > I'm a bit reluctant to have flags only for CIFS/NTFS/FAT that might also be > useful for other filesystems. Where said "other filesystems" have some support for Windows or OS/2 and have bits defined that map directly in semantics, if not in value, to these bits. JFS, for example, has IREADONLY, IHIDDEN, ISYSTEM, IDIRECTORY, IARCHIVE and ISPARSE. > Would we want to be able to get translated > st_win_attrs flags in ext4 attrs when it is being exported by Samba? Actually, I was thinking of proposing an ext4 patch that stored windows flags in a separate word in the inode on disk. There isn't sufficient bit space to map all the windows flags to FS_IOC_GETFLAGS. However, as you say, there is a certain amount of overlap... David -- 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
