From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] vfs: support FS_XFLAG_REFLINK and FS_XFLAG_COWEXTSIZE Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 05:58:08 -0700 Message-ID: <20160911125808.GD1399@infradead.org> References: <147216784041.525.7722906502172299465.stgit@birch.djwong.org> <147216786073.525.16014208838990530622.stgit@birch.djwong.org> <20160905145622.GB7662@infradead.org> <20160906191515.GA26927@birch.djwong.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160906191515.GA26927@birch.djwong.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: Christoph Hellwig , david@fromorbit.com, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-api@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 12:15:15PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > So far I've put the reflink flag to use in xfs_scrub to look for > obvious signs of brokenness such as extents that overlap or have the > shared flag set but the inode flag is off; and to skip various kinds > of checks that don't have to happen when blocks don't overlap. > > I doubt there's much of a use for the flag outside of the XFS utilities. > For a while I pondered only exposing the fsxattr flag if the caller had > CAP_SYS_ADMIN (the level of priviledge required to run scrub) but > decided that I wouldn't change the existing interface like that unless > I had a really good reason. I don't think CAP_SYS_ADMIN is nessecarily the right thing, but it's still an XFS implementation detail which I don't think we should pollute a flags API for normal user space applications with.