Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:a0d1:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id j17csp198601pxa; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 01:17:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyDNoHIT7Omvy00MWEknuSWWOuNjiR25WwuRS9eQNM2MVsdK+lchOG0ltY2KaSq1xf2lIpd X-Received: by 2002:a50:e1cf:: with SMTP id m15mr1148079edl.303.1597393050955; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 01:17:30 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1597393050; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=UNS06X+x3WPZDeF8MY/ahaGhnYKj52ZXE09d9WtTh0FpejJ7OJJgFA1jvXPsa1iWPl JlfPT6IB2NlaTcvKQq4msHrEpqYwKI6IBTjuZGvZuQii07Uwb/RbvdYACfEFyKf8BhqD +wDQa2w1IJUjxhbhWhLeq9m19SoVvGDF8txtDDY70KdBFFJZ+LX6m7UOOqlkV7RZhDPT d82yGykCg7i0/c4AWE8lv33xUEHSpZEUBT+8wC2b7mo3eFBf1spmh33+gvFQHy77EcRF gXCX6LebC04qQdIla1aiH3u81CPhArATKjBZC2YHbgmyYyUrHTWw08wU21K1IpF9ko9w yX5w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=VjG6/kjzycD7/afAQd67dZ7psG9+a6weG9mqxR+9eUI=; b=hLIGLmg5vVBsTvkTiVHKNTNxF5/k8I9MR36HKfcnwAPhO4LuCacjtwO2U0p7ljfuCj OB7Yh8ryjya59LSsKTleEAukjKfW67e5u3Axc+aN33oMgD+A92UekCOG3KJ9YtbXZFBW 3iiQ42DDb25Ah3TLo/4THGWRcGaGwL0hN05PwpIOLWBSygH3bMv/gAwDM5UCGZGN5fPI MZxYbCV2sXV9m3bG//Ak3tXJPAsdmWbX3CCKns+AM+K59gGyuJrpbPSKPgYS1f6/A1NK xciLioqnmc0Cc5VXuMUePmrQbGjM68vdebE/AZkbsHdzdVpGxRyU+YTl2H8LMnptkKIy v20w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id y5si5139568ejm.213.2020.08.14.01.17.07; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 01:17:30 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726911AbgHNIGO (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 14 Aug 2020 04:06:14 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35162 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726050AbgHNIGO (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Aug 2020 04:06:14 -0400 Received: from gardel.0pointer.net (gardel.0pointer.net [IPv6:2a01:238:43ed:c300:10c3:bcf3:3266:da74]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43B63C061383; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 01:06:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gardel-login.0pointer.net (gardel.0pointer.net [85.214.157.71]) by gardel.0pointer.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFD0EE81502; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 10:06:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: by gardel-login.0pointer.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5D7A616081D; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 10:06:12 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 10:06:12 +0200 From: Lennart Poettering To: Linus Torvalds Cc: David Howells , Miklos Szeredi , linux-fsdevel , Al Viro , Karel Zak , Jeff Layton , Miklos Szeredi , Nicolas Dichtel , Christian Brauner , Linux API , Ian Kent , LSM , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: file metadata via fs API (was: [GIT PULL] Filesystem Information) Message-ID: <20200814080612.GB230635@gardel-login> References: <1842689.1596468469@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <1845353.1596469795@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20200811135419.GA1263716@miu.piliscsaba.redhat.com> <52483.1597190733@warthog.procyon.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mi, 12.08.20 11:18, Linus Torvalds (torvalds@linux-foundation.org) wrote: > On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 5:05 PM David Howells wrote: > > > > Well, the start of it was my proposal of an fsinfo() system call. > > Ugh. Ok, it's that thing. > > This all seems *WAY* over-designed - both your fsinfo and Miklos' version. > > What's wrong with fstatfs()? All the extra magic metadata seems to not > really be anything people really care about. > > What people are actually asking for seems to be some unique mount ID, > and we have 16 bytes of spare information in 'struct statfs64'. statx() exposes a `stx_mnt_id` field nowadays. So that's easy and quick to get nowadays. It's just so inefficient matching that up with /proc/self/mountinfo then. And it still won't give you any of the fs capability bits (time granularity, max file size, features, …), because the kernel doesn't expose that at all right now. OTOH I'd already be quite happy if struct statfs64 would expose f_features, f_max_fsize, f_time_granularity, f_charset_case_handling fields or so. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Berlin