From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71B0F34027C; Tue, 21 Oct 2025 14:47:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761058071; cv=none; b=Gx5gVcH9gkwcySbzk79XDne0VCFb6FZlQoSUp4PQi++uo68XdQt8n3yLOibcCDJAFV+n50skhdEs74RpdSGIWpaaMMgvSoL9l0suV3NLVNUJzWKg8BFw2cDJ7npoGVPQbTS5ScN2eg9nSpEIUVwKjjybUqQ4NYwb5szuMl4HRrg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761058071; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wc67v7K34+1bSfnbqCK12nzHrWJDtDJXaAVFmovDbEk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=cz/4Jfar50AjnUYnzbtior7DD22zBwbbJUPmsD/2PDZdmzRZWP9i0hpbJRvp1tdZwmXJzfOmoQ4txF4e2VIv+A4ghK8M6AybkUPvL3t5oo/l2JLmONICjmq5UldPrauTCYpe3uwwVonw6KdoKokgXR/JMJJN85d+YNSv7xHIYDo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=pTYEiFrJ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="pTYEiFrJ" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EAAFCC4CEF1; Tue, 21 Oct 2025 14:47:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1761058071; bh=wc67v7K34+1bSfnbqCK12nzHrWJDtDJXaAVFmovDbEk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=pTYEiFrJr2Rlh9QBbhwjsA2qwNZMOc5+sP8n0Rc/Nkg2NdZyxb55MziGq+N8OxnYj N1mR6tpAMPMturjfa/uBnjmcIUCHezvD2xXaiAKYjKbPzWWoHqr1h0+gUYdto+rY07 kZitVeztJVZUCpon/qlNMki7fgIVohEnM40qg3Xe4AUPuKlThLjR/KUNEwLJ+Sjifs tRRA4lnK0S3VyjsuEdT8uBpcimq5tZuCmcI+BMR2FYhjOg2By1WebwUzOgF4bNFD3X QNP8zu2ZllQZHYd1Ixmv3m0za7nOnJWAunRGBBfWhwm1hZSMJiZoDjr49T1U6u78wx RyEmwMyIICMxA== Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2025 07:47:50 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Theodore Ts'o , zlang@redhat.com, fstests@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4 Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] common/filter: fix _filter_file_attributes to handle xfs file flags Message-ID: <20251021144750.GG3356773@frogsfrogsfrogs> References: <176054617853.2391029.10911105763476647916.stgit@frogsfrogsfrogs> <176054618007.2391029.16547003793604851342.stgit@frogsfrogsfrogs> <20251017162218.GD6178@frogsfrogsfrogs> <20251020163713.GM6178@frogsfrogsfrogs> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: fstests@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 10:30:29PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 09:37:13AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > [add tytso and linux-ext4] > > > > I think we should standardize on the VFS (aka file_getattr) flag values, > > which means the xfs version more or less wins. > > Ok, I'm more than confused than before. Shouldn't we simply use > separate filters for FS_IOC_GETFLAGS vs FS_IOC_FSGETXATTR? Yeah. I was going to just provide both versions, but then I went down the rabbithole of navelgazing about "Is upstream going to accept a helper for the ext4 lsattr flags even though there are no users?" and then wandered off to tackle actual useful things like mount/unmount races in fuse. :P --D