Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc:     Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>,
        Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-man <linux-man@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        xfs <linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
        Xiaoli Feng <xifeng@redhat.com>
References: <e388f379-cd11-a5d2-db82-aa1aa518a582@redhat.com>
 <05a0f4fd-7f62-8fbc-378d-886ccd5b3f11@redhat.com>
 <CAHk-=wgOu9vgUfOSsjO3hHHxGDn4BKhitC_8XCfgmGKiiSm_ag@mail.gmail.com>
 <300456.1606856642@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
 <CAHk-=wgB_e1anR0b4B5p3qxR9nq1-xrRponA6Q6WbGTOSFNmPw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] statx: move STATX_ATTR_DAX attribute handling to
 filesystems
Message-ID: <421cb25d-ca52-0a08-e535-5f650dda8d93@sandeen.net>
Date:   Tue, 1 Dec 2020 18:11:24 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wgB_e1anR0b4B5p3qxR9nq1-xrRponA6Q6WbGTOSFNmPw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 12/1/20 4:09 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> So basically, the thing that argues against this patch is that it
> seems to just duplicate things inside filesystems, when the VFS layter
> already has the information.
> 
> Now, if the VFS information was possibly stale or wrong, that woudl be
> one thing. But then we'd have other and bigger  problems elsewhere as
> far as I can tell.
> 
> IOW - make generic what can be made generic, and try to avoid having
> filesystems do their own thing.
> 
> [ Replace "filesystems" by "architectures" or whatever else, this is
> obviously not a filesystem-specific rule in general. ]
> 
> And don't get me wrong - I don't _hate_ the patch, and I don't care
> _that_ deeply, but it just doesn't seem to make any sense to me. My
> initial query was really about "what am I missing - can you please
> flesh out the commit message because I don't understand what's wrong".

Backing way up, my motivation was: Only the filesystem can appropriately
set the statx->attributes_mask, so it has to be done there. Since that
has to be done in the filesystem, set the actual attribute flag adjacent
to it, as is done for ~every other flag.

*shrug*

In any case I resent the flag value clash fix on a separate thread as
V2, hopefully that one is straightforward enough to go in.

Thanks,
-Eric