From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] [RFC] vfs: 'stat light' fstatat flags
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 18:42:29 +0100
Message-ID: <20090407174229.GD31824@shareable.org>
References: <20090407080046.GQ14571@wotan.suse.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Sage Weil <sage@newdream.net>,
	Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>,
	Andreas Dilger <adilger@sun.com>
To: Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@suse.com>
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail2.shareable.org ([80.68.89.115]:49713 "EHLO
	mail2.shareable.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751228AbZDGRmd (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 7 Apr 2009 13:42:33 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20090407080046.GQ14571@wotan.suse.de>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

Mark Fasheh wrote:
> AT_STRICT allows userspace to indicate that it wants the most up to date
> version of a files status, regardless of performance impact. A distributed
> file system which has a non-coherent inode cache would know then to send a
> direct query to it's server.

Good idea!  Sort out some NFS pain.

If a filesystem doesn't honour AT_STRICT, can we have the function
return an error instead of stale values?

I think AT_SYNC, AT_UPTODATE, AT_CURRENT or AT_NOW are clearer names
than AT_STRICT, but it doesn't matter.

Actually, all the names with AT_ are a bit silly, just because it
happens to use the same flag space at the *at() syscalls.  They don't
have anything to do with "atness".  What about calling these flags
STAT_*?

-- JAmie