Re: [PATCH] utimensat implementation

H. Peter Anvin
2007-05-11T01:05:55Z

Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> I'd be happy to have them. While it's not the nicest API in the world
> it's in Posix and we have to support it at the library level, so we
> should better get it right.
>
> I'd like to avoid having a big swithc statement in every filesystem,
> though, instead of we should have a table-driven approach instead
> where each filesystem defines one table (or multiple ones when it
> supports subtypes with different limits) and just sets a pointer in
> the superblock to it.
>

This is starting to sound an awful lot like statfs(). Maybe we could
create a new statfs call which takes a buffer size input (so that we can
add new fields as time goes on) and which returns the necessary information?

-hpa