From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752133AbaJSOvj (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Oct 2014 10:51:39 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:44454 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751979AbaJSOvi (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Oct 2014 10:51:38 -0400 Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 07:51:38 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Dmitry Monakhov Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, hch@infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] fs: add fadvise file_operation Message-ID: <20141019145138.GB9593@infradead.org> References: <1413645688-13524-1-git-send-email-dmonakhov@openvz.org> <1413645688-13524-3-git-send-email-dmonakhov@openvz.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1413645688-13524-3-git-send-email-dmonakhov@openvz.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 07:21:26PM +0400, Dmitry Monakhov wrote: > sys_fadvise result in direct f_mode modification, which may be not > suitable for some unusual filesytems where file mode invariant is more > complex. In order to support such filesystems we have to delegate fadvise > logic to filesystem layer. Is there a real use case for it? So for it seems mostly about ecryptfs, and even that use is lacking a proper explanation. Also fadvice and set_flags seem entirely unrelated, I don't understand why you're throwing fadvice in thise series.