From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rob Browning Subject: Re: Argument type for FS_IOC_GETFLAGS/FS_IOC_SETFLAGS ioctls Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 10:32:20 -0600 Message-ID: <87k3fr2mp7.fsf@trouble.defaultvalue.org> References: <20131126200559.GH20559@hall.aurel32.net> <20131127010141.GA10273@birch.djwong.org> <20131127040013.GA19941@thunk.org> <20131129045412.GA18142@thunk.org> <20131129052748.GV10988@dastard> <20131129142205.GA21527@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Dave Chinner , Andreas Dilger , "Darrick J. Wong" , Aurelien Jarno , Alexander Viro , linux-fsdevel , Robert Edmonds To: Theodore Ts'o Return-path: Received: from defaultvalue.org ([70.85.129.156]:59213 "EHLO defaultvalue.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932260Ab3K2Qk3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Nov 2013 11:40:29 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20131129142205.GA21527@thunk.org> (Theodore Ts'o's message of "Fri, 29 Nov 2013 09:22:05 -0500") Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Theodore Ts'o writes: > Or we could design an entirely new ioctl that uses a completely new > bitmask allocation scheme, or even a plan9 style set of ascii messages > which are passed back and forth between userspace and the kernel --- > or even insist that btrfs was wrong, that they shouldn't have been > allocating flags out of this legacy ioctl, but should have been using > the existing xattr interface with a new namespace that was either > btrfs specific or a new vfsflag namspace. Likely not a primary concern, but keep in mind the handful of groups attempting to provide cross-platform (and cross-filesystem) save/restore tools. (At the moment bup just saves/restores the raw attr integer, which may not be the correct approach in the long run -- metadata support is still very new, and needs further work.) Thanks for the help. -- Rob Browning rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org GPG as of 2011-07-10 E6A9 DA3C C9FD 1FF8 C676 D2C4 C0F0 39E9 ED1B 597A GPG as of 2002-11-03 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4