Re: [RFC PATCH] fs: xattr-based FS_IOC_[GS]ETFLAGS interface

2014-01-07 Thread Theodore Ts'o
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.

Re: [RFC PATCH] fs: xattr-based FS_IOC_[GS]ETFLAGS interface

2014-01-07 Thread Chris Mason
On Tue, 2014-01-07 at 14:02 -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 07:59:15PM +, Chris Mason wrote: > > On Tue, 2014-01-07 at 11:43 -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 12:04:30PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 07:49:35AM -080

Re: [RFC PATCH] fs: xattr-based FS_IOC_[GS]ETFLAGS interface

2014-01-07 Thread Darrick J. Wong
On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 07:59:15PM +, Chris Mason wrote: > On Tue, 2014-01-07 at 11:43 -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 12:04:30PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 07:49:35AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 01:48:

Re: [RFC PATCH] fs: xattr-based FS_IOC_[GS]ETFLAGS interface

2014-01-07 Thread Chris Mason
On Tue, 2014-01-07 at 11:43 -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 12:04:30PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 07:49:35AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 01:48:31PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > > > I have to say I'm not thrilled

Re: [RFC PATCH] fs: xattr-based FS_IOC_[GS]ETFLAGS interface

2014-01-07 Thread Darrick J. Wong
On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 12:04:30PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 07:49:35AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 01:48:31PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > > I have to say I'm not thrilled by the idea of juggling strings in > > > userspace and in kernel t

Re: [RFC PATCH] fs: xattr-based FS_IOC_[GS]ETFLAGS interface

2014-01-07 Thread Theodore Ts'o
On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 07:49:35AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 01:48:31PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > I have to say I'm not thrilled by the idea of juggling strings in > > userspace and in kernel to set a flag for an inode... > > Nevermind the massive amounts of code

Re: [RFC PATCH] fs: xattr-based FS_IOC_[GS]ETFLAGS interface

2014-01-07 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 01:48:31PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > I have to say I'm not thrilled by the idea of juggling strings in > userspace and in kernel to set a flag for an inode... Nevermind the massive amounts of code that sit in the filesystem. Although my recent ACL patches are the first st

Re: [RFC PATCH] fs: xattr-based FS_IOC_[GS]ETFLAGS interface

2014-01-07 Thread Jan Kara
On Mon 06-01-14 18:58:55, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > This is a proof of concept interface for replacing the contentious > FS_IOC_[GS]ETFLAGS interface with one that presents itself as the > xattr 'system.iflags'. Instead of using integer inode flags, this > interface uses a comma-separated string of

[RFC PATCH] fs: xattr-based FS_IOC_[GS]ETFLAGS interface

2014-01-06 Thread Darrick J. Wong
This is a proof of concept interface for replacing the contentious FS_IOC_[GS]ETFLAGS interface with one that presents itself as the xattr 'system.iflags'. Instead of using integer inode flags, this interface uses a comma-separated string of words, such as "extents,immutable" to describe the inode