Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 10 May 2007 18:01:37 -0700 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] utimensat implementation |
| |
Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > I'd be happy to have them. While it's not the nicest API in the world > it's in Posix and we have to support it at the library level, so we > should better get it right. > > I'd like to avoid having a big swithc statement in every filesystem, > though, instead of we should have a table-driven approach instead > where each filesystem defines one table (or multiple ones when it > supports subtypes with different limits) and just sets a pointer in > the superblock to it. >
This is starting to sound an awful lot like statfs(). Maybe we could create a new statfs call which takes a buffer size input (so that we can add new fields as time goes on) and which returns the necessary information?
-hpa - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |