[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <E1Ov26Q-0000Hd-IT@pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu>
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 08:01:18 +0200
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: "Aneesh Kumar K. V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: miklos@...redi.hu, miklos@...redi.hu, hch@...radead.org,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, adilger@....com, corbet@....net,
neilb@...e.de, npiggin@...nel.dk, hooanon05@...oo.co.jp,
bfields@...ldses.org, miklos@...redi.hu,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, sfrench@...ibm.com,
philippe.deniel@....FR, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -V19 00/15] Generic name to handle and open by handle syscalls
On Mon, 13 Sep 2010, Aneesh Kumar K. V wrote:
> As per your suggestion i started looking at handlefs details and below
> is my take on the approach.
>
> handlefs would be an internal kernel mount like pipefs and would have
> inode object mapping to the returned file descriptor of
> open_by_handle_at syscall for symlinks. For regular files we can do what
> we already does and for symlinks we will create inodes in handlefs and
> their inode operation will in turn result in call out of inode operations
> of the actual symlinks. Based on the above
>
> a) We still need open_by_handle_at syscall
> b) We still need handle based link syscall, because we need to support
> creating hardlinks based on handle, and the existing linkat syscall
> takes the oldpath name.
> c) We still need handle based readlink syscall, because the existing
> readlinkat syscall takes pathname.
You can implement ->read() on the symlink file instead.
> d) we can drop stat, chown and xattr syscall because they are introduced
> specially for symlinks as we don't allow open on symlinks.
> e) It would be nice to have handle based stat syscall to avoid two
> syscall overhead for fetching file attributes when implementing a
> file server, where fetching file attribute is a common operation.
Syscall overhead is generally insignificant compared to other effects.
The server can also cache open files for commonly used handles.
>
> With the above from the current patch series we can drop chown and
> xattr syscalls. Would it be ok if we get the series with the those two
> syscall patches dropped upstream as i work on supporting symlinks with
> handlefs approach ?
Try it.
Al seems to only be active to the outside world around the merge
window, so that's the best time to ask him to pull.
Thanks,
Miklos
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists