xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFC][PATCH] VFS interface for extended attributes

To: Alexander Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] VFS interface for extended attributes
From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 06:27:11 +0100
Cc: Andreas Gruenbacher <ag@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0111121207530.21825-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from viro@xxxxxxxxxxxx on Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 07:32:18PM -0500
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0111121152410.14344-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.GSO.4.21.0111121207530.21825-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.16i
On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 07:32:18PM -0500, Alexander Viro wrote:
> Which means that converting permission() to vfsmount/dentry should be
> done first.  And that's not hard to do.

It's just messy as it will require changes in all file systems.

> Sorry, folks, but idea of private extendable syscall table (per-filesystem,
> no less) doesn't look like a good thing.  That's _the_ reason why ioctl()
> is bad.

Unless I'm badly misreading the patch the op switch() is fixed in VFS mapping
to clearly defined inode operations. It is not extensible per filesystem.
Arguably they could be split into individual syscalls, but it looks not more 
like cosmetics at this point.

-Andi


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>