From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: "J. R. Okajima" <hooanon05@yahoo.co.jp>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stewb@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/5] pathconf(3) with _PC_LINK_MAX
Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 08:39:58 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091206083958.GC14381@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1260086343-8406-1-git-send-email-hooanon05@yahoo.co.jp>
On Sun, Dec 06, 2009 at 04:58:58PM +0900, J. R. Okajima wrote:
> The pathconf(_PC_LINK_MAX) cannot get the correct value, since linux
> kernel doesn't provide such interface. And the current implementation in
> GLibc issues statfs(2) first and then returns the predefined value
> (EXT2_LINK_MAX, etc) based upoin the filesystem type. But GLibc doesn't
> support all filesystem types. ie. when the target filesystem is unknown
> to pathconf(3), it will return LINUX_LINK_MAX (127).
> For GLibc, there is no way except implementing this poor method.
>
> This patch makes statfs(2) return the correct value via struct
> statfs.f_spare[0].
Um... Why do we need that, again? Note that there is no way whatsoever
for predicting whether link(2) will fail due to having too many existing
links before you attempt the call - links can be created or removed between
stat(2) and link(2). So any uses of that value are heuristical.
Can you actually show any use cases of that thing? Preferably - in existing
code, but even a theoretical one would be interesting.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-06 8:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-06 7:58 [RFC 0/5] pathconf(3) with _PC_LINK_MAX J. R. Okajima
2009-12-06 7:58 ` [RFC 1/5] vfs, support " J. R. Okajima
2009-12-06 7:59 ` [RFC 2/5] ext2, " J. R. Okajima
2009-12-06 7:59 ` [RFC 3/5] ext3, " J. R. Okajima
2009-12-06 7:59 ` [RFC 4/5] nfs, " J. R. Okajima
2009-12-06 7:59 ` [RFC 5/5] tmpfs, " J. R. Okajima
2009-12-06 8:39 ` Al Viro [this message]
2009-12-06 9:09 ` [RFC 0/5] " hooanon05
2009-12-06 21:39 ` tytso
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=20091206083958.GC14381@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=hooanon05@yahoo.co.jp \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stewb@linux-foundation.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