linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steve French <smfrench@gmail.com>
To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@sun.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	samba-technical <samba-technical@lists.samba.org>
Subject: Re: ext4 - getting at birth time (file create time) and getting/setting nanosecond time stamps and utime
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 22:31:19 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <524f69650910192031n70514556k404f67adeb51374a@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <890110E9-FA69-4356-9BEB-925F98487C52@sun.com>

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 6:12 PM, Andreas Dilger <adilger@sun.com> wrote:
> On 19-Oct-09, at 16:24, Steve French wrote:
>> some of the performance benefit - path based could be slightly
>> slower (due to path revalidation, and access checks) than
>> handle based calls.
>>       int (*setxattr) (struct dentry *, const char *,const void
>> *,size_t,int);
>>       ssize_t (*getxattr) (struct dentry *, const char *, void *, size_t);
>>       ssize_t (*listxattr) (struct dentry *, char *, size_t);
>>       int (*removexattr) (struct dentry *, const char *);
>
> I'm not sure I understand your point.  sys_fgetxattr() maps directly to
> vfs_getxattr(), and while it still does permission checks, that doesn't
> have anything to do with pathname revalidation AFAICS.
>
> There are an equal number of permission checks in sys_fstat->vfs_getattr()
> as in sys_fgetxattr->vfs_getxattr().

Good point.  Looking more carefully I think you are right - the path
revalidation
is skipped in fgetxattr so it probably isn't much slower if at all (than
a handle based ioctl call would be).

>>> As for being able to write to the "create time" attribute, I would prefer
>>> that this be a filesystem mount option.  For some users (myself included)
>>> I don't care whether Windows is unhappy that it can't update this
>>> creation
>>> time - I'd prefer to know when a file is actually created.
> If this is a flag that a user can configure/select themselves, then it
> is completely useless to me.  If it is a mount option and/or possibly an
> additional process capability that would be more useful.

Yes ... there is a precedent for a process capability for something similar
(e.g. a Windows user must have both the "backup privilege" in his
process capability and specify a flag indicating he wants to
use "backup intent" for certain operations).   There are already
33 capabilities in include/linux/capability.h,  some as narrow as this.

-- 
Thanks,

Steve
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  reply	other threads:[~2009-10-20  3:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-10-19 17:17 ext4 - getting at birth time (file create time) and getting/setting nanosecond time stamps and utime Steve French
2009-10-19 18:55 ` Andreas Dilger
2009-10-19 18:58   ` Jeremy Allison
2009-10-19 19:37     ` Steve French
2009-10-19 19:12   ` Zach Brown
2009-10-19 20:49     ` Jamie Lokier
2009-10-19 19:45   ` Steve French
2009-10-19 20:11     ` Andreas Dilger
2009-10-19 22:24       ` Steve French
2009-10-19 23:12         ` Andreas Dilger
2009-10-20  3:31           ` Steve French [this message]
2009-10-20 12:44           ` jim owens
2009-10-20 20:33             ` Andreas Dilger
2009-10-20 20:49               ` Steve French
2009-10-20 20:59                 ` Sunil Mushran
2009-10-20 21:11                   ` Steve French
2009-10-20 21:23                     ` Sunil Mushran
2009-10-20 21:37                       ` Steve French
2009-10-20 21:49                         ` Sunil Mushran
2009-10-20 21:56                           ` Steve French
2009-10-20 22:16                             ` Sunil Mushran
2009-10-21 23:45                               ` Mingming
2009-10-21 11:59                     ` Henrik Nordstrom
2009-10-21 15:36                       ` Steve French
2009-10-21 18:56                         ` Brad Boyer
2009-10-21 23:03                         ` Björn Jacke
2009-10-22 21:50                           ` Steve French
2009-10-21  0:44                 ` Andreas Dilger
2009-10-21 23:42                   ` Mingming
2009-10-20 21:10               ` jim owens
2009-10-20  0:41   ` Mingming

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=524f69650910192031n70514556k404f67adeb51374a@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=smfrench@gmail.com \
    --cc=adilger@sun.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=samba-technical@lists.samba.org \
    /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).