[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140115103032.GD24171@tucsk.piliscsaba.szeredi.hu>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 11:30:32 +0100
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, dhowells@...hat.com, zab@...hat.com,
jack@...e.cz, luto@...capital.net, mszeredi@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/11] vfs: add renameat2 syscall
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 07:11:16AM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > +
> > + if (flags)
> > + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > +
>
> If (at least for now) only ext4 interprets renameat2() flags,
> I think adding a new member to "struct inode_operations" and
> check it like
>
> if (!old_dir->i_op->swapname)
> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>
> or
This is not just about swapname, but other rename variants too (non-overwriting
rename is also included in the patchset).
>
> if (!(old_dir->i_op->supported_features & flags))
> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
Or rather old_dir->i_sb->s_type->fs_flags. We access it due to
FS_RENAME_DOES_D_MOVE anyway.
I like this variant, because now filesystems need to explicitly add a flag to
*enable* the functionality and not a check to disable it.
Objections?
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