Re: Revised statx(2) man page for review [and AT_EMPTY_PATH question]

2017-04-26 Thread Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
Hi David, On 26 April 2017 at 17:10, David Howells wrote: > Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > >> > This indicates what stx_attributes the VFS and filesystem actually support. >> > >> >>__s32 tv_nsec; /* Nanoseconds before or since tv_sec */ >> > >> > If you're going to do Dm

Re: Revised statx(2) man page for review [and AT_EMPTY_PATH question]

2017-04-26 Thread Al Viro
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:35:08PM +0100, David Howells wrote: > AT_EMPTY_PATH wasn't there back in 2010. I could eliminate the: > > statx(fd, NULL, 0, ...); > > option in favour of: > > statx(fd, "", AT_EMPTY_PATH, ...); > > Any thoughts either way, Al? > > It would seem that AT

Re: Revised statx(2) man page for review [and AT_EMPTY_PATH question]

2017-04-26 Thread David Howells
Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > > This indicates what stx_attributes the VFS and filesystem actually support. > > > >>__s32 tv_nsec; /* Nanoseconds before or since tv_sec */ > > > > If you're going to do Dmitry's suggestion, then this needs to be __u32 and > > you > > sh

Re: Revised statx(2) man page for review [and AT_EMPTY_PATH question]

2017-04-26 Thread Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
Hello David, Thanks for your comments. Some questions below. On 04/26/2017 01:35 PM, David Howells wrote: > > Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > >>Note: There is no glibc wrapper for renameat2(); see NOTES. > > statx, not renameat2. Already reported, and fixed. > >>

Re: Revised statx(2) man page for review [and AT_EMPTY_PATH question]

2017-04-26 Thread David Howells
Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: >Note: There is no glibc wrapper for renameat2(); see NOTES. statx, not renameat2. >__u64 stx_blocks; /* Number of 512B blocks allocated */ The following needs to be added in here: __u64 stx_attributes_mask; /*

Re: Revised statx(2) man page for review

2017-04-26 Thread G. Branden Robinson
At 2017-04-26T07:42:12+0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > On 04/25/2017 10:06 PM, Dmitry V. Levin wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 01:14:26PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > > [...] > >>The file timestamps are structures of the following type: > >> > >>stru

Re: Revised statx(2) man page for review

2017-04-25 Thread Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
On 04/25/2017 10:06 PM, Dmitry V. Levin wrote: > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 01:14:26PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > [...] >>The file timestamps are structures of the following type: >> >>struct statx_timestamp { >>__s64 tv_sec;/* Seconds since the

Re: Revised statx(2) man page for review

2017-04-25 Thread Dmitry V. Levin
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 01:14:26PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: [...] >The file timestamps are structures of the following type: > >struct statx_timestamp { >__s64 tv_sec;/* Seconds since the Epoch (UNIX time) */ >__s32 tv_nsec;

Re: Revised statx(2) man page for review

2017-04-25 Thread Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
Hello Silvan, On 04/25/2017 08:50 PM, Silvan Jegen wrote: > Hi Michael > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 01:14:26PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: >> >> [...] >> >> Could you please carefully review the text below, in case >> I added any errors. > > Just a few comments below. > > >> [..

Re: Revised statx(2) man page for review

2017-04-25 Thread Silvan Jegen
Hi Michael On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 01:14:26PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > > [...] > > Could you please carefully review the text below, in case > I added any errors. Just a few comments below. > [...] > >Invoking statx(): >To access a file's status, no permissio

Revised statx(2) man page for review

2017-04-25 Thread Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
Hello David, et al., I merged your statx(2) page, and edited somewhat heavily. (The merged page source has been pushed to Git.) Could you please carefully review the text below, in case I added any errors. There is one question in a FIXME below. Could you please take a look at that also. Your