Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 05:25:26PM +0100, David Howells wrote: > > That means a filesystem can't simply return non-basic data unconditionally if > > possible. I prefer letting it do so if it doesn't incur any extra I/O > > overheads. > > This seems like it will lead to userspace expecting certain fields to > just be there, and a lot harder to properly verify for tests. Which btw > we all need for these odd behaviors. If we can't get them any time soon > (e.g. before -rc6) I think we'll simply have to revert statx instead of > leaving this untested mess in the tree. Have you reviewed the manpage yet? David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
