Thread (2 messages) 2 messages, 2 authors, 2018-10-18

Re: statx(2) API and documentation

From: Florian Weimer <hidden>
Date: 2018-10-18 15:39:07
Also in: linux-fsdevel, lkml

* Miklos Szeredi:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 12:22 AM, Florian Weimer [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
* Andreas Dilger:
quoted
quoted
So what's the point exactly?
Ah, I see your point...  STATX_ALL seems to be mostly useful for the kernel
to mask off flags that it doesn't currently understand.  It doesn't make
much sense for applications to specify STATX_ALL, since they don't have any
way to know what each flag means unless they are hard-coded to check each of
the STATX_* flags individually.  They should build up a mask of STATX_* flags
based on what they care about (e.g. "find" should only request attributes
based on the command-line options given).
Could you remove it from the UAPI header?  I didn't want to put it
into the glibc header, but was overruled.
To summarize Linus' rule of backward incompatibility: you can do it as
long as nobody notices.  So yeah, we could try removing STATX_ALL from
the uapi header, but we'd have to put it back in, once somebody
complains.
I don't recall a rule about backwards-incompatible API changes.  This
wouldn't impact ABI at all.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help