From: Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ext4: add EXT4_IOC_GETCRTIME ioctl
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:03:50 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48A94906.8030505@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080818023656.GA20338@mit.edu>
Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:08:11AM +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
>>> I'm worried about writing a struct timespec directly to user space,
>>> because the kernel's idea of what is struct timespec might not be the
>>> same as the userspace's understanding of struct timespec ---
>> We have system call nanosleep(), which copies a struct timespec directly
>> from user space.
>
> The difference is that for system calls, we have a glue layer (glibc)
> whose duties include translating between the kernel data structures
> and the userpsace data structures --- and for various architectures
> there are ***no*** guarantees that the interfaces shipped by glibc in
> /usr/include match up with the data structures used by the kernel in
> /usr/src/linux/include/linux.
>
> When you use an ioctl, you bypass the glibc translation layer, so life
> can get iffy here. And given that struct timespec contains time_t,
> which *can* differ from architecture to architecure in in terms of
> being either 32 bits or 64 bits, and what is in the kernel might be
> different from what is in the user space /usr/include, I get doubly
> nervous.
>
I got the point, thanks. :)
>>> I think we would be better off explicitly defining a structure, or
>>> just returning the seconds and nanoseconds in explicit primitive
>>> types.
>
> That's the quick and dirty fast answer, yes. The long-term (but one
> which involves much more work) is to define a new struct
> kernel<->glibc stat interface (we already have 5 or so :-) to extend
> it include st_crtime, and then try to get glibc to use the magic of
> ELF symbol versioning so there is a new struct stat as defined in
> /usr/include, and a new stat(2) call defined in glibc, which returns
> the new struct stat which include st_crtime. This also means we have
> to define proper semantics for what happens if a filesystem doesn't
> support st_crtime.
>
Yes, my first thought was if stat can report crtime.
So, for now I think we can use timespec_to_ns() to convert the time to
a s64 value and return it to the userspace.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-18 10:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-06 9:09 [PATCH 1/3] ext4: add EXT4_IOC_GETCRTIME ioctl Li Zefan
2008-08-10 2:26 ` Theodore Tso
2008-08-18 2:08 ` Li Zefan
2008-08-18 2:36 ` Theodore Tso
2008-08-18 9:01 ` Andreas Dilger
2008-08-18 10:03 ` Li Zefan [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=48A94906.8030505@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).