linux-kernel - Re: Attempt at "stat light" implementation

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <49DB8F8E.9010605@garzik.org>
Date:	Tue, 07 Apr 2009 13:38:22 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	Jamie Lokier <jamie@...reable.org>
CC:	Oleg Drokin <green@...uxhacker.ru>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Attempt at "stat light" implementation

Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Once you have fine-grained selection of stat fields - it's natural to
> ask why not allow _additional_ stat fields in an future-extensible
> fashion?  A few things would be handy sometimes, such as inode
> generation number, modification generation number (to detect changes
> across reboots), and extra flags indicating COW or other properties.

That's quite an interesting thought...  until you run out of flags, the 
stat structure becomes a bit more flexible.

	Jeff



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/