From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755683Ab2ICBju (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Sep 2012 21:39:50 -0400 Received: from youngberry.canonical.com ([91.189.89.112]:53226 "EHLO youngberry.canonical.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755477Ab2ICBjt (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Sep 2012 21:39:49 -0400 Message-ID: <50440A5A.900@canonical.com> Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2012 09:39:38 +0800 From: Jeremy Kerr User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120714 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "H. Peter Anvin" CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Matthew Garrett , Matt Fleming , Matt Domsch Subject: Re: [RFC,PATCH] efi: Add support for a UEFI variable filesystem References: <1346319009.951368.767015086462.1.gpush@pecola> <503FA15F.7070506@zytor.com> <50400859.2080606@canonical.com> <5e40036f-b0da-47f3-acba-5dea9fdb7ed6@email.android.com> In-Reply-To: <5e40036f-b0da-47f3-acba-5dea9fdb7ed6@email.android.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org hi hpa, > Wouldn't that be better handled by O_APPEND? Possibly, but this then means that there are now two "interfaces" that specify the variable attributes. [Also, in that case we should support the same mechanism through open(); llseek(0, SEEK_END) then, right?] In general, I think the attributes-in-a-header mechanism is a little tidier than providing them in the filename. For instance, finding if a variable exists from userspace will require iterating the dentries (or trying all combinations of variables), if the attributes aren't known. However, I'm happy to implement this if it's the generally-preferred solution. Cheers, Jeremy