From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760418AbZDGRim (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Apr 2009 13:38:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759446AbZDGRi3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Apr 2009 13:38:29 -0400 Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:52166 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752729AbZDGRi2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Apr 2009 13:38:28 -0400 Message-ID: <49DB8F8E.9010605@garzik.org> Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2009 13:38:22 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090320) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jamie Lokier CC: Oleg Drokin , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, LKML Subject: Re: Attempt at "stat light" implementation References: <20090407062356.GA1336463@fiona.linuxhacker.ru> <20090407173248.GC31824@shareable.org> In-Reply-To: <20090407173248.GC31824@shareable.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -4.4 (----) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.2.5 on srv5.dvmed.net summary: Content analysis details: (-4.4 points, 5.0 required) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jamie Lokier wrote: > Once you have fine-grained selection of stat fields - it's natural to > ask why not allow _additional_ stat fields in an future-extensible > fashion? A few things would be handy sometimes, such as inode > generation number, modification generation number (to detect changes > across reboots), and extra flags indicating COW or other properties. That's quite an interesting thought... until you run out of flags, the stat structure becomes a bit more flexible. Jeff