> Separate the handling of the local ia_valid bitmask from the one in
> attr->ia_valid. This allows us to hand off the actual handling of the
> ATTR_KILL_* flags to the .setattr i_op when one is defined.
>
> notify_change still needs to process those flags for the local ia_valid
> variable, since it uses that to decide whether to return early, and to pass
> a (hopefully) appropriate bitmask to fsnotify_change.
I agree with this change and fuse will make use of it as well.
Maybe instead of unconditionally moving attr_kill_to_mode() inside
->setattr() it could be made conditional based on an inode flag
similarly to S_NOCMTIME. Advantages:
- no need to modify a lot of in-tree filesystems
- no silent breakage of out-of-tree fs
Actually I think the new flag would be used by exacly the same
filesystems as S_NOCMTIME, so maybe it would make sense to rename
S_NOCMTIME to something more generic (S_NOATTRUPDATE or whatever) and
use that.
But that could still break out-of-tree fs, so a separate flag is
probably better.
Miklos
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 19:43:46 +0200
Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Separate the handling of the local ia_valid bitmask from the one in
> > attr->ia_valid. This allows us to hand off the actual handling of the
> > ATTR_KILL_* flags to the .setattr i_op when one is defined.
> >
> > notify_change still needs to process those flags for the local ia_valid
> > variable, since it uses that to decide whether to return early, and to pass
> > a (hopefully) appropriate bitmask to fsnotify_change.
>
> I agree with this change and fuse will make use of it as well.
>
> Maybe instead of unconditionally moving attr_kill_to_mode() inside
> ->setattr() it could be made conditional based on an inode flag
> similarly to S_NOCMTIME. Advantages:
>
> - no need to modify a lot of in-tree filesystems
> - no silent breakage of out-of-tree fs
>
> Actually I think the new flag would be used by exacly the same
> filesystems as S_NOCMTIME, so maybe it would make sense to rename
> S_NOCMTIME to something more generic (S_NOATTRUPDATE or whatever) and
> use that.
>
> But that could still break out-of-tree fs, so a separate flag is
> probably better.
>
In the past I've been told that adding new flags is something of a
"last resort". Since it's not strictly necessary to fix this then
it may be best to avoid that.
That said, if the concensus is that we need a transition mechanism,
then I'd be open to such a suggestion.
--
Jeff Layton <[email protected]>