> generic_listxattr() is different from generic_getxattr() /
> generic_setxattr() / generic_removexattr. It makes sense only for
> filesystems that support a fixed set of xattrs, which means that all
> handlers will have handler->name set.
>
> If any of the handlers has handler->prefix set instead, that handler
> matches a whole set of attributes. Generic_listxattr() would have to
> fill in all of those names matching that handler, but it doesn't know
> which those are.
>
> It is common for filesystems to have their own listxattr inode
> operation and still use generic_{get,set,remove}xattr.
That clears things up a bit. So that leaves a few questions. First
question is looking at several of the file system's implementations
I noticed it contains loops such as:
list_for_each_xattr(entry, base_addr) {
const struct xattr_handler *handler =
blah_xattr_handler(entry->e_name_index);
const char *prefix;
size_t prefix_len;
size_t size;
if (!handler || (handler->list && !handler->list(dentry)))
continue;
...
}
Is the handler->list() test needed for a private listxattr implementation?
Also I don't see anyone using handler->list() which which brings up the
next question. What is the purpose of list() function?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-unionfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
