Re: openat(..., AT_UNLINKED) was Re: New copyfile system call - discuss before LSF?

Pavel Machek
2013-03-31T22:50:27Z

On Sun 2013-03-31 18:44:53, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-03-31 at 20:32 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > > Hmm. open_deleted_file() will still need to get a directory... so it
> > > > > > will still need a path. Perhaps open("/foo/bar/mnt", O_DELETED) would
> > > > > > be acceptable interface?
> > > > >
> > > > > ...and what's the big plan to make this work on anything other than ext4 and btrfs?
> > > >
> > > > Deleted but open files are from original unix, so it should work on
> > > > anything unixy (minix, ext, ext2, ...).
> > >
> > > minix, ext, ext2... are not under active development and haven't been
> > > for more than a decade.
> > >
> > > Take a look at how many actively used filesystems out there that have
> > > some variant of sillyrename(), and explain what you want to do in those
> > > cases.
> >
> > Well. Yes, there are non-unix filesystems around. You have to deal
> > with silly files on them, and this will not be different.
>
> So this would be a local POSIX filesystem only solution to a problem
> that has yet to be formulated?

Problem is "clasical create temp file then delete it" is racy. See the
archives. That is useful & common operation.

Problem is "atomicaly create file at target location with guaranteed
right content". That's also in the archives. Looks useful if someone
does rsync from your directory.

Non-POSIX filesystems have problems handling deleted files, but that
was always the case. That's one of the reasons they are seldomly used
for root filesystems.

Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html