Re: [PATCH 0/6] Extended file stat system call
- From: Roland McGrath <roland hack frob com>
- To: David Howells <dhowells redhat com>
- Cc: "linux-cifs vger kernel org" <linux-cifs vger kernel org>, "linux-nfs vger kernel org" <linux-nfs vger kernel org>, "nautilus-list gnome org" <nautilus-list gnome org>, "libc-alpha sourceware org" <libc-alpha sourceware org>, "kfm-devel kde org" <kfm-devel kde org>, "samba-technical lists samba org" <samba-technical lists samba org>, "Myklebust, Trond" <Trond Myklebust netapp com>, "linux-api vger kernel org" <linux-api vger kernel org>, Steve French <smfrench gmail com>, "wine-devel winehq org" <wine-devel winehq org>, "linux-fsdevel vger kernel org" <linux-fsdevel vger kernel org>, "linux-ext4 vger kernel org" <linux-ext4 vger kernel org>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Extended file stat system call
- Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:05:52 -0700 (PDT)
> What if the xstat() and struct xstat eventually becomes what userspace
> uses as stat() (as a wrapper) and struct stat (if such a thing is
> possible with glibc versioning)?
It's certainly possible with symbol versioning, though it seems much more
likely that we'd stick with the existing struct stat and stat* interfaces
and only have the implementation using statx underneath (e.g. for new
machines or kernel ABIs where the kernel stops providing any calls except
for statxat), at least for the foreseeable future.
> Do older programs that think they're using stat() and don't know about
> the extra fields available expect to see a useful value in st_ino?
POSIX requires that st_ino have a useful value for the standard *stat calls.
Thanks,
Roland
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]