From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:39122 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755585AbcARPk1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2016 10:40:27 -0500 Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 16:40:38 +0100 From: Jan Kara To: Eric Sandeen Cc: Jan Kara , Christoph Hellwig , fsdevel , Eric Sandeen , xfs@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] quota: add new quotactl Q_XGETQUOTA2 Message-ID: <20160118154038.GE6850@quack.suse.cz> References: <568FEA2C.6080708@redhat.com> <20160109072600.GA21636@infradead.org> <20160111132617.GD6262@quack.suse.cz> <5693D33A.5090307@sandeen.net> <20160111162807.GK6262@quack.suse.cz> <5696D27A.9070700@sandeen.net> <20160115093507.GA15950@quack.suse.cz> <56992CD4.6030408@sandeen.net> <20160118103302.GD6850@quack.suse.cz> <569D0238.5060407@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <569D0238.5060407@sandeen.net> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon 18-01-16 09:18:16, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 1/18/16 4:33 AM, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Fri 15-01-16 11:31:00, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > ... > > >> For a purpose-built interface of "find the next ID" that wouldn't require any > >> structure or interface changes... > >> > >> We could name it Q_GETNEXTQUOTA / Q_XGETNEXTQUOTA to make it explicit about > >> the purpose, and document that return behavior. Done & done. ;) > >> > >> A new grand unified extensible quota call sounds like a great idea, I just > >> hate to gate this work on designing a brand-new interface. > > > > OK, ok. I like Dave's proposal for quotactl2(). So let's leave the unification > > for later and implent Q_GETNEXTQUOTA and Q_XGETNEXTQUOTA with the > > functionality of your original Q_XGETQUOTA2. Having separate call to get > > next ID would save us one new quotactl but OTOH we would need two syscalls > > (and quota structure lookups) to report one structure and there are > > potentially *lots* of them. > > Ok, I can re-do it with the new Q_[X]GETNEXTQUOTA names, I've already done > the non-xfs one as well, just starting testing on that. > > With or without the flags argument? Without. For further extensibility I'd really go for the unified API in the end. Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR