From: David Howells Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] statx: Add a system call to make enhanced file info available Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 10:33:33 +0100 Message-ID: <25305.1463996013@warthog.procyon.org.uk> References: <20160523082230.GA21308@infradead.org> <20160510070421.GB30896@infradead.org> <6897.1462868755@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20160512091141.GA22420@infradead.org> <3204439.9qcmCY96fi@wuerfel> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, Arnd Bergmann , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, samba-technical@lists.samba.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160523082230.GA21308@infradead.org> Content-ID: <25304.1463996013.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Honestly I think this really matters on the amount of 'emulation' we > need - if it's just adding a new flag that can be trivially generated > in the syscall stub in userland that's probably fine, but if we have > actually differing semantics (like the stat weak attributes) I'd rather > have a properly documented syscall. If we otherwise need to rewrite > whole structures I'd much rather do that in kernel space. I very much agree. > And to get back to stat: if would be really useful to coordinate the > new one with glibc so that we don't end up with two different stat > structures again like we do for a lot of platforms at the moment. I've tried reaching out to them and others, but no one responded. David