From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 369831419BC; Wed, 22 May 2024 18:33:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716402808; cv=none; b=HwOBNq+6mz/GWnux/Rz6exNp+9v1ix+VHrIB1HCDoiS1LDHixUvtfGt9J91VnY6aLUgdlLV/k7RRoB8MSjM1la/JPpJKEX2KvFS6Yx8onRX+Hu+HoRoxRYn/Koh14b/wP6cOTTyJtyrd34ohRohfpkKjBqPYX2Hs6fxuTsLLmuM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716402808; c=relaxed/simple; bh=00+z9eUtGaL7iexG3FS/WqSmo5CJdAYqSZxtY5+qPkg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Rt6QxmB+5It2npmLauPvnCpY6zMRNpA61c4F8k8g051O8rkiEoS5DdHOszJmKOzMu1n0TcuP+ByObJvmFsGwBSgTOLs4/UgjtNILTHjyevwIbr9oeWR5dEA+mTe+YxcpyOAd+6WIHqu8+y9tI6QsaliUTZXDKd8jHLctjZ3ubhM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=P4DSL8kc; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="P4DSL8kc" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BB993C2BBFC; Wed, 22 May 2024 18:33:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1716402808; bh=00+z9eUtGaL7iexG3FS/WqSmo5CJdAYqSZxtY5+qPkg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=P4DSL8kcCY8EI1BRLe9FzpBtaALcS1vingyt6LFQup8H3iq12gs5LHgTgprre/gmD 2cxjTBPcGZ/1+BfnG+hsugU3CupopQ0+XzAC4yEu6J+w8cT9Mmx0q+7xpxSvbCrMqw HOGCAguWesdM8dhafgPn0nVJJa3Cuqt13t1MVugywyqoqgf3Udl0SljwpkvPC0on4/ XUcYGPaaxmE2DjwJKIw9KVnt4m1CP2YLyW0R17OPIzO3umDP++u1ikr4rwW8/GaElC +sxvw8TssCJMo95SV6RVitnOvqzfQ0sofFErraOLZQCGu6ifoF9EuL5NG1Np8cVK+W Mq+6FNgxGZE2Q== Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 11:33:26 -0700 From: Eric Biggers To: Andrey Albershteyn Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , Amir Goldstein , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Alexander Viro , Christian Brauner , Jan Kara , Miklos Szeredi Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] fs: add FS_IOC_FSSETXATTRAT and FS_IOC_FSGETXATTRAT Message-ID: <20240522183326.GC1789@sol.localdomain> References: <20240520164624.665269-2-aalbersh@redhat.com> <20240520164624.665269-4-aalbersh@redhat.com> <3b7opex4hgm3ed6v24m7k4oagp2gnsjms45yq223u2nnrbvicx@bgoqeylzxelj> <20240522162853.GW25518@frogsfrogsfrogs> <20240522163856.GA1789@sol.localdomain> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 07:23:15PM +0200, Andrey Albershteyn wrote: > On 2024-05-22 09:38:56, Eric Biggers wrote: > > On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 09:28:53AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > > > > Do the other *at() syscalls prohibit dfd + path pointing to a different > > > filesystem? It seems odd to have this restriction that the rest don't, > > > but perhaps documenting this in the ioctl_xfs_fsgetxattrat manpage is ok. > > > > No, but they are arbitrary syscalls so they can do that. ioctls traditionally > > operate on the specific filesystem of the fd. > > > > It feels like these should be syscalls, not ioctls. > > Won't it also be a bit weird to have FS_IOC_FS[S|G]ETXATTR as > ioctls for normal files and a syscall for special files? When both > are doing the same thing > Why would the syscalls be restricted to operating on special files? - Eric